UK-EU Common Understanding Negotiations

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

Yes, indeed. There are fees on businesses today—£200 per consignment on export health certificates, £1,400 if a business is selected for sampling, £61 for identity checks—all of which can be swept away when the SPS agreement is implemented. As I said to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton), the objective is to implement that in the first half of 2027.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The intentions behind the Erasmus scheme are unobjectionable, but £570 million is an awful lot of money, so I am very pleased that there will be a review after 10 months. Will that review include an assessment of the scheme against what happened in the past, which was essentially to provide a benefit for predominantly middle-class humanities university students, and will he ensure that the opportunity costs to further education, which is tasked with upskilling our young people from a different demographic, are adequately taken into account?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

First, to give the right hon. Member some reassurance on further education—by the way, I agree with the point that this has to be open to people from all backgrounds, and I think the Erasmus+ scheme of today is very different from how it was even 10 years ago—the chief executive of the Association of Colleges, which represents our FE sector, has today called this “brilliant news” for staff and students of all ages in further education colleges. I hope that gives him the reassurance that this is not simply about universities, hugely important though our university sector is.

Secondly, on the right hon. Member’s point about the review, it will absolutely be data-led. We have had this debate before about participation versus contribution, and I have always said there has to be a fair balance—that is why I have negotiated the discount in the way I have—but the review will allow us to move forward on the basis of solid data about the numbers of participants. I am always in favour of data-led decision making.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Wednesday 19th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Matthew Patrick]

The Secretary of State has been clear that currently, there is no evidence that there is a majority in favour of constitutional change. Of course, we defend the principle of consent and the right of the people in Northern Ireland to determine their constitutional future. It is totally legitimate for people to advocate for the future they want to see.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

Does the Minister agree that reported attempts to extend European Parliament observer status to politicians in Northern Ireland are bound to inflame tensions between communities in Northern Ireland and between communities in Northern Ireland and Great Britain? Will he say that the UK Government will have absolutely nothing to do with this attempt to break up our United Kingdom?

[Matthew Patrick]

I have seen no such proposals. We have agreements in place with the European Union to ensure that there is engagement with Northern Ireland on any matters that might impact it.

China Espionage: Government Security Response

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am always grateful to the right hon. Gentleman—one of my predecessors—for his contributions, to which I listen very carefully. On his final point, he knows precisely what the Government’s line is with regard to China. He makes a good point about the contribution of the ISC. I hope that members of that Committee understand and recognise the importance that we attach to their work. We intend to have regular contact with the Committee, including in the near future. He makes an entirely reasonable point about contracts; I will take that away, undertake to look at it and come back to him privately with a response.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

I welcome the package and the Minister’s commitment to continued engagement with Beijing, but does he share my view that one cannot reason with a tiger when one’s head is in its mouth? We are rapidly approaching that position because of the stranglehold that China has on this country by virtue of our reliance on critical minerals and rare earths. As he seeks to strengthen our position, will he ensure that we diversify our ability to gain access to those critical elements, thus ensuring that China respects this country rather than sees us as weaklings—a situation that would of course deteriorate further in the event that, God forbid, China controls Taiwan?

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, as I always am. I am conscious that I have now been joined on the Treasury Bench by the Foreign Secretary, so I will have to be extremely careful about how I characterise the relationship with China. I hope it will provide some reassurance to the right hon. Gentleman if I say that the Government will bring forward a critical minerals strategy. It will be led by the Department for Business and Trade but there will be significant input from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. I hope that he understands how seriously we take these matters. I understand why he characterises the relationship in the way that he does, but I know that, as a former Minister himself, he will understand that there is a degree of practical reality about how we manage that relationship. Yes, we ensure that we underpin our national security, but we must engage in other areas. It is important that we do that in a clear-eyed way, and that is how the Government will proceed.

China Spying Case

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Burghart]

My right hon. Friend makes a very pertinent point and is personally very experienced in such things. It has been reported that the National Security Adviser chaired that meeting. That is to say that he was taking a very active role in what was going on. That is why it is incredibly important that the Government come clean with us about what happened in that meeting, who attended and what was decided there.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The National Security Adviser has spent a great deal of time visiting various Chinese entities before and after his appointment. One appointment that he does not appear very keen on taking up is with the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, which has requested—quite legitimately, under the Osmotherly rules—that he appears before it, but Ministers appear to be blocking that. Why does my hon. Friend think that is?

[Alex Burghart]

My right hon. Friend is right: the National Security Adviser showed a great reluctance to attend. I understand that he has now agreed to attend, although the report I read said that he was going to attend in camera. If that report is correct—the Minister has the opportunity to say it is not true—I am not sure that that is the best level of transparency that this House might expect.

The second instance of inconsistency and inaccuracy that we draw attention to is from 7 October, when the Prime Minister told journalists that what mattered in this case was the designation of China as it had been in 2023, when the offences were alleged to have occurred. However, last week, on 24 October, the Director of Public Prosecutions said that that was categorically not the case. He said:

“The test was…positively not what the then Government was prepared to, or did, say in public about China…but rather whether China was—as a matter of fact—an active threat to national security.”

This is a most important point, and one that was revisited yesterday. There is a very serious question about why the deputy National Security Adviser believed that he would

“need to be in line with government policy at the time”,

when the Crown Prosecution Service said that it did not need to know about policy, but about the facts. The Minister should explain to the House why the deputy National Security Adviser chose to ignore the CPS in this case. He should also tell us whether he thinks the deputy National Security Adviser complied with civil procedure rule 35, which requires him to assist the court and overrides any other obligation.

Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Ward]

Throughout the evidence, the threats that China poses are set out multiple times. There is complete consistency between the two. Obviously there are very serious threats—I have read them out in my statements.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The deputy National Security Adviser is clear in his evidence that China is the greatest state economic threat to the UK. Does the Minister agree with that? Is he seriously trying to suggest that the deputy National Security Adviser, given what he has said in his evidence, did not clear what he was doing with the CPS with his superiors, Jonathan Powell or Ministers?

[Chris Ward]

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying, the Prime Minister said yesterday, and the Security Minister said on Monday.

Middle East

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

We are having conversations with all, particularly on the question of education and healthcare—on many other issues as well, but education and healthcare are absolutely fundamental. We are having those discussions, and I will ensure that any further information my hon. Friend may have is fed into what we are doing.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The Hamas leadership are making it clear that their fighters, many of whom will have been involved on 7 October, will not disband but will merge into the nascent army of a Palestinian state—a state which the Prime Minister unwisely and prematurely recognised. Is he comfortable with that?

[The Prime Minister]

The 20-point plan is really clear on the steps that need to be taken. That is what has been hammered out with the support and approval of so many countries. That is not easy, but it is a step that many thought was unachievable. We now have to operate to that plan, ensuring, as is absolutely clear from the plan and from all our statements, that Hamas can have absolutely no role in the governance of Palestine. That is a clear red line. We need to operate to the 20-point plan now. The widespread agreement to it is something many people thought could not be achieved. It has been achieved, and now we must build on that.

Security Update: Official Secrets Act Case

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Monday 13th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

I have to say to the right hon. Gentleman, whom I respect very much indeed, that his answer to the question put by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright), the former Attorney General, raised more questions than he gave answers. Is he seriously suggesting that the National Security Adviser, with all his links to the 48 Group and to the Grandview Institution, had no involvement whatsoever in the advice that went to the Crown Prosecution Service? While he is about it, will he clarify that apparent conflation of this country’s economic ties with China, which he appeared to give in mitigation for the mess that the Government appear to have got themselves into?

[Dan Jarvis]

I respect the right hon. Gentleman too, and I hope that he will understand that any Government will seek to balance issues relating to national security as well as issues relating to economic prosperity. That, I think, is not an unreasonable way in which to proceed. I do, however, want to pick him up on one point: the National Security Adviser does not have any links to the 48 Group.

Official Secrets Act

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his remarks, but I hope that he would acknowledge that the incidents he described, about which he rightly has concerns, were condemned by the UK Government at the time. The UK Government have been clear about the fact that we will not tolerate transnational repression on those living in the UK. FIRS falls out of the National Security Act, and he knows that we have already announced that two nations will be included on the enhanced tier. Any further decision about other nations being included will be made in due course.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The Minister euphemistically described our relationship with China as “complex”. It is not complex. It is characterised by espionage, malign behaviour and a massive trade imbalance. How is that complex, and why do this Government persist in opposing the views of their advisers and permitting—even facilitating—this massive centre for espionage close to the centre of our financial quarter?

[Dan Jarvis]

I have a lot of time for the right hon. Gentleman, but I do not agree with what he has just said, I am afraid, nor do I agree with the characterisation he makes around the embassy. I have said to him and the House previously that national security will be the overriding priority with regard to any decision that is made independently in a quasi-judicial process led by the Secretary of State. I can again give him an assurance that when it comes to any decision about the embassy, as has been detailed in letters that the previous Foreign Secretary and I have sent, national security will absolutely be at the forefront of any consideration.

Government Resilience Action Plan

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that important question. Subsea cables are vital to the working of our economy and our defences, and those who wish us harm know that. It must be part of our national defence and our defence thinking to defend our international communication structures under the sea.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The tier 1 exercise that CDL mentioned in response to Baroness Hallett’s recommendation 6 in module 1 of her report on covid 19 is much to be welcomed. However, he will be aware that part of the problem with Exercise Cygnus in 2016 was that the results were not made public at the time, and a lot of it remained classified. In the light of what has been said today, will he ensure that the Government’s approach to this exercise is different, and that the results are made public quickly, so that they can be interrogated?

UK-EU Summit

Andrew Murrison Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I agree wholeheartedly. It has to benefit all our young people, whether through work, travel or study, and we will make sure that it does. We want to provide young people with this important opportunity and help them to take advantage of it.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

How will Britain’s head start in gene-editing technology be impacted by the rule-taking reversionary measures that the Prime Minister has announced?