05 Nov 19. Dealing with Autocratic states: MPs call for Government action in face of mounting evidence of interference. Despite mounting evidence, the UK Government is failing to engage with the threat from autocratic states intent on interfering with the international rules-based system, says the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Today’s Report, ‘A cautious embrace: defending democracy in an age of autocracies’ says the battle for university students or trade deals should not outweigh the international standards which have brought freedom and prosperity to the UK and the wider world. The Report is also critical of the Government’s failure to use key sanction tools such as ‘Magnitsky Powers’ to curb interference.
Universities are not alive to the growing risks of autocracies’ influence on academic freedom in the UK, say MPs. While autocracies seek to shape the research agenda or curricula of UK universities, or limit activities on university campuses, not enough is being done to protect academic freedom from financial, political and diplomatic pressure.
Government’s advice to academia on the potential threats from autocracies is ‘non-existent’. FCO evidence to the inquiry failed to demonstrate the Department had considered the threat from autocracies to academic freedom, nor engaged sufficiently with other Whitehall departments or counterparts in the US, Australia or elsewhere. A 2019 International Education Strategy White Paper mentions China more than 20 times in the context of boosting education expertise to the Chinese market, but with no mention of security or interference.
The Committee calls on the FCO and universities to address this challenge together by examining the evidence; coordinating efforts with like-minded countries and appointing a Whitehall champion to oversee Government efforts.
Government has been too slow to use key foreign policy tools at its disposal to curb interference by autocracies. The powers granted under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act have not been used and it must establish the power and processes to block company listings in the UK on national security grounds. The Committee urges the FCO to set out why it has not used Magnitsky-style sanctions in response to ongoing repression by state authorities in Hong Kong and Xinjiang. The Committee repeats its call for cross Whitehall coordination with the appointment of a single, accountable, Senior Responsible Owner.
Chair of the Committee, Tom Tugendhat MP, said: “The freedom and prosperity of democratic states is rooted in the international rules-based system. We must stand together with partners as our shared history is woven together. We must protect each other and ourselves in the face of autocratic states who are concentrated on undermining and interfering with hard-won liberties. Our Report finds the UK Government and the Foreign Office wanting in three policy areas: autocracies’ influence on academic freedom; the use of sanctions against autocratic states and their supporters, and the UK’s cooperation with other democracies in responding to autocracies. Across Whitehall, the FCO must step up to lead work to develop a co-ordinated response. Foreign influence is a matter for the Foreign Office, but we could find little evidence that the department is driving this. There is a better balance to be found. The Committee is not blind to the incentives for more students or stronger business links – but this should be weighed with full awareness of the serious risks involved.”
04 Nov 19. The Welsh Affairs Committee today publishes its report assessing the contribution of the Armed Forces and defence industry within Wales. The report calls on the UK Government to provide clarity about the future defence footprint in Wales and raises concerns around the closure of military bases and the impact that this may have on the local community. The Committee is calling on the UK Government to work alongside the Welsh Government to ensure that base closures do not result in a reduction of the defence footprint in Wales.
The UK Government should consider the potential to relocate at least one of the three Welsh combat units from England to Wales, reverse the decision to move the RAF Training School and provide clarity on the relocation of regiments and plans for MOD St Athan.
Additionally, the Committee reports concern about the decline in recruitment. They were told that although Wales represents 5% of the UK’s population, only 2% of the Armed Forces are stationed in Wales. This could decrease to 1% if base closures go ahead as planned. The Committee asks the UK Government to make an explicit commitment to maintaining the numbers of forces in Wales, similar to the agreement made with Scotland.
Chair of the Welsh Affairs Committee, David T. C. Davies MP, said: “The Welsh contribution to the UK defence industry is indispensable, but recent decisions taken by the UK Government jeopardise Wales’ vital role in the Armed Forces. Over the years Wales has proven a significant contributor to the Armed Forces, provided space for bases and training grounds, and has become a centre of innovation within our defence and aerospace industries. The decision to close the two main army bases in Wales- Brecon and Cawdor Barracks- and the clustering of units in the south of England will have a profound impact on the surrounding communities, who have fostered close ties to the Armed Forces over generations, and the families who have contributed both financially and culturally to the local area. The location of all Welsh combat units outside of Wales poses a very real challenge to the preservation of Welsh connections and identity. The UK Government must do more to nurture the crucial contribution that Wales, and the Welsh people, have made, and will continue to make, to both the Armed Forces and the defence industry.”
Our report’s key recommendations include:
The UK Government must ensure that base closures do not result in a reduction of the defence footprint in Wales.
Decisions about the relocation of regiments currently based in Wales must be confirmed very soon, and the possibility of relocating at least one of the Welsh combat units from England to Wales should be explored.
The UK and Welsh Governments must urgently provide clarity about future plans for MOD St Athan, and reverse the decision to relocate the RAF Training School.
The UK Government should set specific recruitment targets for Wales and track performance against these targets.
Steps should be taken to reduce the distance that applicants to the Army have to travel, including the use of hubs and temporary centres in all areas of Wales.
The UK Government should make the bidding processes for contracts less complex and provide more support, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. The UK Government must ensure that any decisions about the wider defence footprint in Wales do not impact negatively on any projects that have been awarded to businesses and supply chains in Wales.
01 Nov 19. Nesting a dragon: 5G decision and the Telecoms Supply Chain Review to be deferred to the next Government. The news is revealed in correspondence between the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Tugendhat MP and the Secretary of State at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Nicky Morgan MP. Ahead of dissolution, Mr Tugendhat sought answers from the Secretary of State on when the Government would announce its final decision on allowing high-risk vendors access to the UK’s market for 5G telecommunications infrastructure and how it would inform Parliament of its final decision. The UK’s major telecoms operators are already rolling out their 5G networks across the country. The Telecoms Supply Chain Review was laid before the House in July but the Government was not in a position to make a final decision in relation to high risk vendors. This was due to the market uncertainty caused by US Government action to place Huawei on its Entity List for restricted trading on national security grounds.
Chair of Committee, Tom Tugendhat MP, commented: “The Foreign Affairs Committee has been investigating the way the autocratic states intervene in democracies. Many members have been concerned about the Chinese technological dominance, nowhere more than in the 5G market. I wrote to the DCMS secretary to ensure that no decision would be made in the tail end of the government. I’m pleased to hear that a decision that could nest a hostile state’s technology deep in the central nervous system of the UK communications network will be taken by a new administration after a full debate. This decision has major foreign policy implications as it calls into question our most important security partnership, the Five-Eyes Alliance, and our economic relationship with other nations around the world, including Australia, Canada and the United States.”
The Committee expects to publish a short report on the Autocracies inquiry prior to the House being dissolved on 6th November.
A copy of the correspondence is attached to this email.
House of Commons and House of Lords Hansard Written Answers
Q
Asked by Stephen Morgan
(Portsmouth South)
Asked on: 31 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Queen Elizabeth
8278
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when he plans to announce the location for a new dry dock facility capable of housing HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Queen Elizabeth.
A
Answered by: Anne-Marie Trevelyan
Answered on: 05 November 2019
The Ministry of Defence has no current plans to construct a dry-dock facility for the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers.
Plans for a long-term in-service support solution for the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers are under consideration as part of the Common Support Model for complex warships. However, on current plans, routine scheduled repair and refitting of the two Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers, other than dry-docking, will be conducted at her Majesty’s Naval Base Portsmouth and will sustain jobs at that site.
Grouped Questions: 8279 | 8280
Q
Asked by Kate Hoey
(Vauxhall)
Asked on: 31 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
National Rifle Association
8190
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the National Rifle Association’s compliance with its charitable purpose to promote the (a) efficiency of the armed forces and (b) defence of the Realm.
A
Answered by: Johnny Mercer
Answered on: 05 November 2019
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Dissolution.
Q
Asked by Lord Moonie
Asked on: 29 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
Maritime Patrol Aircraft
HL519
To ask Her Majesty’s Government under what rules the Boeing P-8 Poseidon Maritime Patrol Aircraft for the Ministry of Defence has been certified as airworthy; and where certified by a third party, what plans they have to re-certify for airworthiness via the Military Airworthiness Authority.
A
Answered by: Baroness Goldie
Answered on: 04 November 2019
The P-8A Poseidon MRA Mk1 has been certified as airworthy in accordance with the Military Airworthiness Authority’s (MAA) Military Air System Certification Process, as laid out in Regulatory Article (RA) 5810.
The MAA issued a United Kingdom Restricted Military Type Certificate for the Poseidon MRA Mk1 on 19 September 2019.
Q
Asked by Norman Lamb
(North Norfolk)
[N]
Asked on: 30 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Defence: Digital Technology
7658
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, who is responsible for digitisation in his Department; and what mechanisms the person with responsibility for digitisation uses to champion digitisation.
A
Answered by: Anne-Marie Trevelyan
Answered on: 04 November 2019
The Director General, Chief Information Officer (CIO), is responsible for digital maturity in the Ministry of Defence.
The CIO has mechanisms in place across defence to ensure that we regularly exploit modern digital opportunities to improve the outputs of defence. These mechanisms include a pan-Defence Digital & IT (D&IT) Coherence Board, a single D&IT Transformation programme, innovation centres of expertise and the maintenance of common IT architectures and standards.
Q
Asked by Lord Moonie
Asked on: 30 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft
HL552
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the figures for the delivery of F-35 aircraft to the Ministry of Defence in the National Audit Office’s report Delivering Carrier Strike, published on 16 March 2017, remain the planned delivery rates; and if not, why those rates have changed.
A
Answered by: Baroness Goldie
Answered on: 04 November 2019
The planned F-35 delivery rates remain the same as those published in the NAO’s report.
Q
Asked by Stewart Malcolm McDonald
(Glasgow South)
Asked on: 24 October 2019
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
EU Defence Policy
5050
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps the Government is taking to ensure that the UK continues to be able to participate in EU-led military operations abroad under the aegis of the Common Security and Defence Policy in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
A
Answered by: Christopher Pincher
Answered on: 01 November 2019
In the event of a No Deal exit from the EU, the United Kingdom would be obliged to withdraw personnel from all Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) operations and missions since the legal basis for our participation would no longer exist. For Operation ALTHEA, we have previously made the offer to discuss a third country agreement that would allow the United Kingdom to maintain its contribution after a no deal exit, but the EU have not engaged with us on this offer.
Q
Asked by Sir Nicholas Soames
(Mid Sussex)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
Turkey: Guided Weapons
6177
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent discussions he has had with his NATO counterparts on the potential effect of Turkish missile systems on UK air operations against Daesh.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has spoken to NATO counterparts on various occasions about a range of topics, most recently at the NATO Defence Ministerial meeting on 24-25 October. The UK has repeatedly raised concerns at Ministerial and official level about the Turkish purchase of S-400 missiles.
Q
Asked by Sir Nicholas Soames
(Mid Sussex)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
Turkey: Guided Weapons
6178
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent discussions he has had with his (a) Turkish counterpart and (b) NATO counterparts on Turkey’s acquisition of Russian anti-air missile systems.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has raised our concern about Turkey’s acquisition of the Russian S-400 missile system with both our Turkish and wider NATO counterparts. Turkey is a valued NATO Ally, on the front line of some of the UK and the Alliance’s most difficult security challenges. Defence equipment procurement decisions are for individual nations, but all NATO allies have committed to reducing their dependence on Russian-sourced military equipment.
Q
Asked by Mr Steve Baker
(Wycombe)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
EU Defence Policy
6356
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he has taken to ensure that UK defence priorities are not subordinate to EU capability development priorities.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
The UK continues to conduct its defence policy according to its own priorities and to assess EU capability development initiatives on that basis. For example, the UK decided not to join Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO). The Government has said that it may wish to participate in some EU capability development projects as part of the future partnership, on a voluntary and case-by-case basis where of clear benefit to the UK. The Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration provide such options to cooperate.
Q
Asked by Mr Steve Baker
(Wycombe)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
EU Defence Policy
6357
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what his policy is on the UK’s defence capability being subject to the EU’s Coordinated Annual Review on Defence after the UK has left the EU.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
The Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) is a stocktake of EU Member State plans for defence spending and capability development. Non-EU countries do not participate. The UK will, however, continue to call for full coherence between CARD and NATO’s Defence Planning Process to avoid unnecessary duplication and to address issues of common interest such as interoperability of military forces.
Q
Asked by Mr Steve Baker
(Wycombe)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
EU Defence Policy
6358
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make it his policy to ensure the UK does not enter into permanent binding commitments within the EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation after the UK has left the EU.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
The Government has made clear that EU defence initiatives should be: coherent with NATO requirements; available to NATO; and have the fullest participation of non-EU NATO Allies. Where these conditions are met, the UK can support the development of EU tools such as Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO).
The UK has not joined PESCO as an EU Member State, but has expressed an interest in participating in capability development projects as part of the future partnership, on a voluntary and case-by-case basis, where this is of clear benefit to the UK. PESCO-participating Member States continue to negotiate the terms on which third countries might take part in PESCO projects.
Q
Asked by Mr Steve Baker
(Wycombe)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Ministry of Defence
European Defence Fund
6359
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make it his policy for the UK not to participate in the European Defence Fund after the UK leaves the EU.
A
Answered by: Mark Lancaster
Answered on: 31 October 2019
The UK/EU Political Declaration states that the UK and the EU will consider UK industry participation in European Defence Fund programmes in order to facilitate interoperability and to promote joint effectiveness of our armed forces.
Q
Asked by Sir Nicholas Soames
(Mid Sussex)
[N]
Asked on: 28 October 2019
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
USA: Open Skies Treaty
6179
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations he has made to his US counterpart on the importance of that country’s continuing co-operation under the Open Skies Treaty.
A
Answered by: Christopher Pincher
Answered on: 31 October 2019
Senior officials from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence have raised the topic with their US counterparts, emphasising that we believe the Treaty remains a valuable Confidence and Security Building Measure which contributes to military transparency and reducing the risk of conflict.