Hong Kong: Electoral Reforms

Richard Graham Excerpts

Wednesday 10th March 2021 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Adams]

The hon. Lady makes a fair point about the offer to BNOs. Work is happening across Government, and the scheme is devised principally by the Home Office, but in close collaboration with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. We are working very closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which has the work of ensuring there is proper support not just by Government but across civil society and other groups to ensure that those who take up this route arrive here with the correct support.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con) [V]]

The not-yet-confirmed accounts of proposals being considered by the National People’s Congress would, if true, contradict the commitment of the UK and China that the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong, including those of speech and assembly, will remain unchanged. Does the Minister agree that they might also run against China’s own Basic Law for Hong Kong, article 45 of which states that the ultimate aim of elections in Hong Kong is the selection of a Chief Executive by universal suffrage, in accordance with democratic principles?

As chairman of the all-party China group, I will be writing to the NPC on this issue. Will my hon. Friend confirm whether he has raised this with the acting Chinese ambassador, and whether Dame Caroline Wilson has raised it with the Chinese MFA in Beijing?

[Nigel Adams]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question and for all the work he does and has done in this area over many years. We have spoken directly to the chargé at the Chinese embassy, and our ambassador in Beijing, who has been there only a small number of months, is in regular contact there as well. My hon. Friend raises the issue of universal suffrage, and we certainly will not be taking any lessons on that from Beijing. We have made clear our concerns and urged the Chinese authorities to uphold their commitments to the people of Hong Kong. That includes respecting their fundamental rights and freedoms, and also Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy.

Myanmar

Richard Graham Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd February 2021 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Adams]

I understand the point that the hon. Gentleman is trying to make. On the reference to genocide, we have been very clear that we support the current case in the ICJ process, putting pressure on Myanmar. I think the case will develop significantly in the coming months; we are monitoring that case very closely.

I do not have a crystal ball with regards to the points the hon. Gentleman raised about China, but we are going to very closely consider the legal arguments and, for example, establish whether a UK intervention would add value in the current case that has been brought to the ICJ.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con) [V]]

This is a huge setback for the people of Myanmar and for the development of open societies in the ASEAN region as a whole. The civil disobedience movement started by Government hospital doctors suggests an awful potential for protests and violence. While the Minister is quite right to highlight UK initiatives for an emergency session of the UN Security Council and with ASEAN, which has called for a return to normality, can I ask what contacts my hon. Friend and his Department have had with China to discuss the best way to return stability as soon as possible?

[Nigel Adams]

I thank my hon. Friend, who I know is extremely passionate, for all the work that he does on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government in that region. ASEAN does have an important role to play. I had meetings with the Thai Vice Minister this morning. Yesterday, I spoke with the Laos ambassador, and I have further calls with all ASEAN nations over the next 48 hours. It is important that there is adherence to the principles of the ASEAN charter, which includes good governance and the rule of law. We will, of course, be speaking with China in this regard, as it is a significant player in the region. We are completely clear that the principles of democracy and constitutional government should be returned for the people of Myanmar.

Hong Kong: Sentencing of Pro-democracy Activists

Richard Graham Excerpts

Monday 7th December 2020 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Adams]

My right hon. Friend makes a very important point. In terms of international action, that is exactly why we and 38 other countries at the UN General Assembly in New York joined in our statement, which expressed deep concern at the situation in Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang. The United Kingdom will continue to bring together international partners to stand up for the people of Hong Kong. It is absolutely imperative that we speak up and call out the violation of their freedoms, and that we hold China to account for its international obligations.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

This House watches with sadness any reduction of the freedom of expression—guaranteed under the joint declaration—in Hong Kong, although, as the Minister confirmed, these sentences were not under the new security law. Does my hon. Friend agree that Hong Kong’s importance as a centre of international business hinges on its independent rule of common law, in which UK and other Commonwealth judges play a key role; that, without that, the system of one country, two systems, which Deng Xiaoping and Margaret Thatcher pledged would endure for 50 years, would be sadly weakened; and that we should not lightly make things worse for the people of Hong Kong?

[Nigel Adams]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this point. I agree that the assault on Hong Kong’s autonomy, rights and freedoms tarnishes China’s international reputation. The prosperity of Hong Kong and its way of life relies on respect for those fundamental freedoms, an independent judiciary and the rule of law. We have been vocal and practical in standing up for the people of Hong Kong, and will continue to do so.

China

Richard Graham Excerpts

Monday 20th July 2020 Commons Chamber

[Dominic Raab]

Yes, we will certainly look at them very carefully.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

In suspending our extradition treaty with Hong Kong, has the Foreign Secretary decided that one country, two systems in Hong Kong is dead, in which case it would be wrong for UK and Commonwealth judges to play such an important role in the Court of Final Appeal, or has he decided to wait to see how China implements the security law while working to preserve other aspects of the joint declaration—particularly Hong Kong’s independent rule of law, under which our judges have played such an important role in the CFA?

[Dominic Raab]

My hon. Friend raises an excellent point. We will watch very carefully to see whether and the extent to which the new national security legislation impinges on the judicial autonomy that, under the Basic Law and joint declaration, should be afforded to Hong Kong. We will consult widely across Government but also with the judiciary about what further steps we take in the light of that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Richard Graham Excerpts

Tuesday 17th March 2020 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Adams]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise this issue. I know of the particular problem. I have spoken to other hon. Members about constituents who are probably in the same accommodation. I spoke this morning with the Vietnamese ambassador, with a request that the British nationals are moved urgently into hygienic conditions, so we are working on that and I will have an answer from the ambassador. Rest assured, we are doing our best to improve the treatment for those individuals.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

Although the immediate focus of our interests in south-east Asia rightly has to be the safety of British citizens and how we can get them back home, which no doubt will emerge shortly in the statement, I know that the Secretary of State shares my huge enthusiasm for the potential in south-east Asia for greater trade, investment and, indeed, much wider partnerships. Will he say today whether the idea of having an Association of Southeast Asian Nations investment forum, which would be as good and possibly even better than the Africa investment forum, is one that he supports?

[Dominic Raab]

I thank my hon. Friend, who is playing to all my prejudices with his question. We are absolutely committed to ratification of CPTPP, the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership. We are also committed to joining ASEAN formally with dialogue partner status. In the context of that, he raises an interesting idea. It is obviously difficult to host conferences at the moment, but that is certainly something we should keep under review.

China’s Policy on its Uighur Population

Richard Graham Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2020 Westminster Hall

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

It is a huge pleasure to join today’s debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) on bringing the matter to the House. He made valid points about China living up to its constitutional commitments to non-discrimination and its commitments made through the United Nations, and he asked searching questions about what exactly is going on there.

By way of background I shall make what is, if you like, a quick declaration of interest. I chair the all-party parliamentary group on China and I lived in China for several years. Most relevantly to this debate, I spent considerable time in Xinjiang and was part of the first ever successful crossing of the Taklamakan desert in 1993 with a small group of other Britons, Uighurs and Han Chinese. I should, I say as a matter of observation, have died there of amoebic dysentery.

A few years ago, I took the all-party group to Xinjiang—and a sad experience it was, too. The vibrant markets were closed, there were armoured cars on every street corner, young Muslims were banned from mosques, and much more besides. I paid tribute then, and do so again now, to our embassy officials who deal with human rights in the British embassy in Beijing, who continue to do their best to keep informed of the situation.

The situation today is of course always difficult to analyse. Few people in the Chamber, if any, will have been to Xinjiang in the past 18 months. Some of us may have found helpful Twitter accounts such as @dakekang where there are plausible accounts of what is going on. Most relevantly, of course, Her Majesty’s Government have raised the issue most profoundly with the United Nations. It was emphasised in the statement of 23 nations to the United Nations that we had concerns about the situation with respect to human rights, security and travel restrictions, as well as China’s move possibly to ratify the International Labour Organisation’s forced labour convention and a series of other points —validating, in effect, the eight recommendations made by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, whose 2018 report remains a seminal document for those interested in Xinjiang.

This is a time when there are huge difficulties with different types of human rights in China as a result of the tragic expansion of coronavirus, and we should be sensitive to that. We should also be sensitive to the fact that in the past, there have been Uighur terrorist activities, not least the bombing at Chengdu station and the car in Tiananmen Square some years ago, so we should not be naive about everything that happens there. Will the Minister update us on the Foreign Office’s analysis of terrorist activities in Xinjiang? Will he update us on China’s progress towards ratifying that important ILO convention?

This issue matters, as the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) rightly said, because ultimately, if there is substantial proof that global manufacturers are using forced Uighur labour deported elsewhere in China, that will seriously undermine their own brand reputations. It will create problems for their continuing manufacturing in China and that in turn could cause serious problems for growth, jobs and the economic prosperity of China.

Ultimately, this is my final appeal to my friends in China. It will be impossible to hide what is going on in Xinjiang forever. Sooner or later the world is going to know. Some of the accusations may be inaccurate, but many of them may prove to be very accurate, and if that is the case, China as a great nation should surely do her best to preserve her reputation and right what is not right.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Linden]

It is definitely a cold—that has been confirmed.

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) for securing today’s debate. The hon. Members for Congleton (Fiona Bruce), for St Helens South and Whiston (Ms Rimmer), for Rutland and Melton (Alicia Kearns), for Bolton South East (Yasmin Qureshi), for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) and for Gloucester (Richard Graham) all made impassioned speeches, and I think the debate has been enriched by that.

At the risk of repeating what has already been said, I will seek to limit my remarks to a few key areas. This matter is certainly not new. It has been widely reported as far back as April 2017 that the Uighurs and other Muslims, including ethnic Kazakhs and Uzbeks, have been detained. The fact that we are talking about this issue three years later is shameful. What is truly alarming about the situation in Xinjiang is the sheer scale and institutional nature of the repression. Reports from the region paint a very bleak picture indeed. More than 1 million Uighur Muslims have been arbitrarily detained in re-education camps. Most of the people detained have never been charged with any crimes and have no legal avenues whatever to free themselves. For many of those who have been detained, the harsh reality is that their only crime is being Muslim.

Uighur Muslims have been identified as extremists purely for practising their religion, but this is not the first time that I have spoken about freedom of religious belief in China. Many will be aware of the persecution of Christians and Falun Gong adherents, to name but two religious minorities. That of course flies in the face of China’s own constitution, which specifically protects freedom of religious belief, yet time and again we see that not to be the case at all.

What particularly worries me is the UK’s response. A recent report by the Foreign Affairs Committee notes that some of China’s international interests actively conflict with those of the UK Government. It stated that the

“current framework of UK policy towards China reflects an unwillingness to face this reality.”

The report further urges the UK Government to actively respond

“to China’s attempts to subvert international human rights mechanisms, and support UN efforts to investigate the extremely concerning situation in Xinjiang.”

Our post-Brexit reality adds a new aspect to the situation. The former Brexit Secretary, the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis), believed—perhaps naively—that we should look to China to replace our lost trade with Europe and deliver our future economic salvation. We have passed that point now, but there really are fundamental issues at play regarding trade and the price we are prepared to pay. For me, turning a blind eye is simply not an option, and I am on the record saying that many times, particularly in relation to India. I have this overwhelming fear that human rights may be forgotten or overlooked in the rush and scramble to conclude a trade deal. I am sure the Minister will seek to reassure me on that point when he responds. However, he can understand my scepticism, given the Government’s track record.

Since the EU referendum in 2016, the number of arms export licences issued to countries on the Foreign Office’s own human rights watch list has doubled, so the Minister will understand my concern and why so many of us in this House seek proper reassurances and guarantees on the Government’s commitment to human rights and freedom of religious belief. Last week, the Minister tried to reassure me in the Chamber that the Government

“will not pursue trade to the exclusion of human rights.”—[Official Report, 3 March 2020; Vol. 672, c. 755.]

While that reassurance is welcome, we need to see it become a central tenet of any trade negotiations with other countries. I know that many here will share the view that human rights should form the foundation of any such talks, rather than being a consideration.

Moving forward, we need to see the UK exercising soft power where Xinjiang is concerned. I would like to hear a commitment from the Minister today that the Government will exert influence on China to welcome UN officials to the province without restrictions. We all need reassurances that the Government will also do all they can to encourage other countries to do likewise, because if we ignore persecution against religious minorities, we open the door for every kind of intolerance and persecution.

[Richard Graham]

One thing we have to be aware of is that while we and the other 22 countries that signed the letter are doing our best to pursue some of these key issues in Xinjiang, very few, if any, Muslim countries in the world have spoken up about this. Does that not strike the hon. Gentleman as odd?

[David Linden]

The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point. We and every Government have a responsibility to make that point and to ensure that we are standing up for Uighur Muslims, so he is right to put that on the record. I certainly encourage Governments in all countries to do that. As a practising Christian, I am very much of the view that although there might not be persecution against me, it is my duty as part of my religious faith to stand up for minorities and other religions. I think that is something we are called to do. I implore other countries to put that point on the record.

To conclude, we need to do the right thing and take action. Members of the House have made impassioned speeches on the issue, and there is a consensus. The Minister would have our support in taking that forward to get proper action to protect Uighur Muslims.

Commonwealth in 2020

Richard Graham Excerpts

Monday 9th March 2020 Commons Chamber

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

It is a great pleasure to be here today on Commonwealth Day and the day of the Commonwealth service, when all 53 flags are flying in Parliament Square—a day when the Birmingham Commonwealth Games Bill was brought before Parliament and the Minister has arranged for us to have a Commonwealth debate.

I think I arranged the first such debate in 2012 as the founding chair of the all-party group on the Commonwealth and, at that stage, Parliamentary Private Secretary to the first of two Ministers for the Commonwealth. It is a great treat to be here with him—the comeback kid of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He puts the “C” firmly back into the FCO: three times returned to the FCO to keep that C flag flying. If he has been to only 18 out of the 19 Commonwealth countries in Africa, surely his officials have an opportunity to arrange a trip to the 19th—we could even have a sweepstake on which one he has not been to.

It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford), the living symbol of UK-New Zealand partnership in this Chamber. His speech followed two maiden speeches of great distinction. My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (James Sunderland) typifies the concept of service before self, having moved seamlessly from the Army to Parliament, where I know he will put his constituents first. I shall return to one of his Commonwealth themes later.

We also heard a passionate speech from the hon. Member for Leicester East (Claudia Webbe). I have no doubt that everyone who lives in the Nevis Islands will celebrate her speech and her presence in the Chamber. She shared with us all a vivid talent for focusing on some of the crimes of the past, while perhaps skating lightly over some of the more recent scandals. We welcome her to the House. The Commonwealth is part of her, but it is also part of me, because I am a child of the Commonwealth. I was brought up in Kenya, and the atrocities in Hola to which she alluded were part of my childhood.

In the Chamber, although many of its Benches are empty at this late stage of the evening, people from all over the Commonwealth are celebrating today and what it means. This is a moment for congratulations, but also for us to reflect, each year, on what the Commonwealth means and how it is progressing. I must say that I do not share the intrinsic gloom of the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Lloyd Russell-Moyle), who was ashamed of the past, apologetic for the present, and gloomy about the future. That, I am afraid, is my summary of his lengthy speech. He described finding “glimmers of hope” in the Commonwealth, but I think we can do better than that.

Let me give just one example of the symbol of the success of the modern Commonwealth and the countries within it. The whole business of being able to conduct financial transactions over a mobile telephone was not invented in some rich western country, or even by state-sponsored technology innovation programmes in China; it was invented and formed in Kenya. It is possible to travel over large chunks of that most lovely country and find Masai herdsmen nestling a spear in one hand while looking out over their goats and, with the other hand, transacting their business over their mobile telephones, often returning in the evening to their huts where the telephones can be recharged by a miniature solar panel. There is much to be proud of in all parts of the Commonwealth: there is innovation, and much more than “glimmers of hope”.

There has been huge progress on eliminating malaria and reducing blindness, and on the Prime Minister’s campaign in promoting 12 years of education across the Commonwealth and, indeed, across the world, supported by the Department for International Development. I believe that, in future, this country in particular will be able to offer considerable expertise to help other parts of the Commonwealth to thrive. Cyber-security is incredibly important to us all, and, as we know from what happened in the headquarters of the African Union in Addis Ababa, there are all sorts of reasons why it should be strengthened—not just across that continent, but in other parts of the Commonwealth, including the parts where I spend some of my time nowadays as the Prime Minister’s trade envoy in the far east: Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore, three nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which are members of the Commonwealth.

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

May I present another offer of hope, and a glimmer of light from the Commonwealth? Will the hon. Gentleman join me in congratulating Rwanda, where the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting will be held? It has made enormous strides in respect of water and sanitation, which is especially impressive because it is such a mountainous country. Many other Commonwealth countries need to go further in those respects to achieve health and wealth: through the Commonwealth and our work with DFID projects, we can achieve that as well. Water and sanitation need to be part of CHOGM, and part of our work with the Commonwealth.

[Richard Graham]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her considerable intervention, which demonstrated her love of Rwanda. No doubt she has spent a great deal of time there. I am occasionally in touch with a former Anglican bishop of Rwanda, who is equally proud of some of the great progress that has been made in that country.

There is a slight warning note about Rwanda, which is a remarkable member of the Commonwealth. Her history is different, as she joined 28 years ago—something like that—and there is a caveat for all of us: not to put its leader on a pedestal. We are all human, and we all have feet of clay. I remember vividly the disappointment felt by many hon. Members when Aung San Suu Kyi became Prime Minister of Burma, but then presided over one of the world’s saddest periods of internal conflict and possible genocide against the Rohingya people. That was a period in which those who had strongly supported her opening the new Labour offices when she visited London had cause to reflect on the fragility of all of us as humans.

I return to two or three things that I should like to ask the Minister. During our time as the chairing office, various initiatives were launched, all of which I supported strongly—for example, the new business Commonwealth standards network, the world trade-based trade facilitation agreement, the Commonwealth clean oceans alliance, and the marine economies programme. All those were good news, and worthy causes. Will the Minister give us a brief update on how they are doing, and whether the progress made during our time in the chair can be continued?

Will the Minister also consider something else, so that we can end on a note of great consensus among Members all parties in the Chamber, including the hon. Member for Glasgow North (Patrick Grady), who made a very good speech on the Commonwealth, wrapped in a more traditional speech about the European Union? The point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell about Commonwealth servicemen and women having to pay considerable amounts of money when applying for the right to remain here after five years’ service is something about which many of us feel strongly. In fact, I attracted 125 signatures to a letter that I wrote to the then Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Sajid Javid), last year. He was sympathetic, as were Ministers in the Ministry of Defence, who said that it was a Home Office decision.

I encourage my hon. Friend the Minister to take careful note of today’s debate and the feelings on this issue. I understand that there are problems—there always are—of precedence and cost. There are lots of different problems, as we want those Commonwealth servicemen to be motivated by the concept of serving in our armed forces rather than purely being attracted to the later possibility of being able to bring their whole family here. I understand all those problems, but my hon. Friend, who is nodding from a sedentary position, would probably agree on something about which many of us feel strongly, as does the British Legion. There must be an opportunity for the new Government to do us all a favour by taking a closer look at what can be done to help Commonwealth servicemen and women on Commonwealth Day, in a debate in which there is much good will across the House to make the Commonwealth prosper.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tom Hunt]

Absolutely. Things are not great at the moment for Ipswich Town—we are 10th in the third division and things look pretty bleak. Only four weeks ago we beat Lincoln 1-0 and we were top of the table, so how quickly things can change—maybe I was a bad omen. Cricket unites Commonwealth citizens across the continents and is truly a great symbol of what we share, as last year’s world cup demonstrated.

[Richard Graham]

One of the things that I hope the Minister will celebrate when he winds up this evening is the role of the Commonwealth within the United Kingdom today. As my hon. Friend has mentioned, we all have Commonwealth citizens serving in our hospitals and often in our armed forces, as has been mentioned. In many areas of life the children of the Commonwealth are playing such an important role, and we need to celebrate that this evening.

[Tom Hunt]

I could not agree more. They truly are the best of us, and that needs to be recognised to an even greater extent.

One point on which I agree with the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Lloyd Russell-Moyle) is the issue of Commonwealth citizens serving in our armed forces. Currently, when Commonwealth personnel have served for at least four yours and wish to continue to live in this country, they face fees of nearly £2,400 per person for indefinite leave to remain. That means that a family of four faces a cost of over £9,500. The House does not need to be reminded of the enormous sacrifices made for us by those countries now in the Commonwealth during the great conflicts of the 20th Century. At least a quarter of those who laid down their lives for Britain’s cause in the first world war were not British. Commonwealth citizens still fill the shortages in our ranks today.

Those who sacrifice so much for our country, and who have travelled far from their families to do so, should not face such exorbitant fees to stay in the country they have served. I urge the Government to waive the fees for brave Commonwealth troops serving in the British military, as they did in 2018 when they waived immigration fees for Afghan interpreters who had aided British forces in Afghanistan. If anybody should not be considered a foreigner in our country, it is them.

This country’s decision to leave the European Union was not inward-looking or isolationist, but an opportunity to pursue a global future as an independent, sovereign country. It is an opportunity because leaving the European Union by itself is just the beginning of that effort. As we take our first steps as an independent country, reaching out to our partners in the Commonwealth should be one of our highest priorities. The theme for this year’s Commonwealth Day is “Delivering a Common Future: Connecting, Innovating, Transforming”. It is a message that we must embrace wholeheartedly. Whether it is trade, immigration, integration or co-operation, so many of the right preconditions already exist to create more Commonwealth success stories. People strongly believe in the Commonwealth links we share, in Ipswich and across the country. Let us act on these human relations and turn them into a reality for this country’s new relationship with the Commonwealth.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Graham]

The Minister will remember that a year ago, he and I sat down together and discussed a project, which is now known as CP4G—the Commonwealth Partnership for Good—between the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Westminster Foundation for Democracy and other partners. As he knows, that partnership has been put together. Its focus is on trying to help youth, women, LGBT and those with disabilities into parliamentary democracy. Does he agree that this helps to answer some of the questions asked by the Opposition, and that it is proving successful?

[James Duddridge]

I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution. It has been a very successful programme, which drills down into specific countries rather than being about generalities, and gives covering fire to discuss problematic issues in those countries under the guise of discussing a whole number of matters.

A number of colleagues and the Labour Front Benchers mentioned the issue of Commonwealth veterans. I have listened very carefully to those comments, and I will be seeking a discussion with the Minister for Defence People and Veterans, who is now separate from the Ministry of Defence and from the Home Office. I was asked to have a meeting with him, and I think that is the right way forward. There is also the issue of the veterans of the second world war. I have not yet received parliamentary questions on that, although I understand that there have been historical questions. I am more than happy to review those questions and to respond to further such questions.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (James Sunderland) was introduced incorrectly, I think, as a new Member of Parliament, so competent and lucid was he. However, I will never ever be able to listen to the phrase “blue rosette on a donkey” or “blue rosette on a monkey” without hearing the example from Bracknell of a blue rosette on a dog turd. I do not thank my hon. Friend for that analogy. I think he is a very modest man—we heard later in an intervention of his service in the Falkland Islands—and a very sensible man from the Logistics Corps who praised in advance the logistics of this House, which serve us all incredibly well.

The hon. Member for Glasgow North (Patrick Grady) pointed out that we have served together a number of times in debates on this issue and will continue to do so. I look forward to working with my Scottish colleagues and will be visiting the joint headquarters of the Department for International Development next week in East Kilbride.

My hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) has been an advocate for all things overseas territories and dependencies. I cannot promise him an outcome, but the trajectory of travel is to work closer and closer with the overseas territories and Crown dependencies. He raised a very good point about the flags, and he asked me not to take them down tomorrow. I can confirm that I will not take them down tomorrow, and that I will consult Government protocol to find out why they cannot stay up for longer, so that we can celebrate the Commonwealth over a longer period. I know that he has been passionate about flags, and that he has had a big flag raised at the other end of this building, and I am keen to support the celebrations further.

We had an excellent speech from the hon. Member for Leicester East (Claudia Webbe). I am not sure what it says about her parents—they spent all that time on Nevis, an island state of 11,000 people, without meeting and then they nipped over to Leicester and suddenly they were together. I am minded to say that there must be something in the water, or perhaps it is the Pukka Pies that she was advocating in her speech. On behalf of the whole House, I would like to wish Keith Vaz a happy retirement from politics and thank him for his service on the Commonwealth parliamentary executive, among his other achievements. I will now also always think of Leicester East as the minorities that make up the majority; that is rather a lovely way of describing an eclectic and interesting constituency.

My hon. Friend the Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) explained to me the rivalry between New Zealand and Australia, and I welcome his putting on record that my brother is now an Australian. He also talked of coastal states and small states, and climate change—an issue that we will follow closely as part of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting and COP26.

My hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) thanked me for being the comeback kid and for putting the C back into the Commonwealth. I did wonder what he was talking about, and then I realised that the C stood for Commonwealth. I thank him for his experience and passion, and for setting up his all-party group.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Tom Hunt) talked eloquently of historic bonds and mentioned the trade benefits from the Commonwealth post EU. My hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Alicia Kearns) talked about us coming together as equals in a tour de force of speech. I thought she was going to break the convention of not interrupting a maiden speech; she was writhing in her seat in anger at references by the hon. Member for Leicester East to Pukka Pies, because she maintains that Melton Mowbray pork pies that are the best pies in the whole Commonwealth.

This has been an excellent debate, and I hope it is an annual one. With that, I do not intend to detain the House further.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the Commonwealth in 2020.

Recent Violence in India

Richard Graham Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd March 2020 Commons Chamber

[Nigel Adams]

I do share the right hon. Gentleman’s concerns. The UK Government have broad concerns about the Act, which is why we are engaging directly with the Government. He is right to raise this matter because it is a huge concern.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

Those of us with significant Indian Muslim communities will have seen videos showing shocking orchestrated sectarian violence. Can I encourage the Minister to invite the Indian high commissioner to his office to share with him the deep concern of many of our constituents about their families and friends in India? If there is one silver lining in this very dark cloud it is what one Gujarati Muslim said to me, which is that he and his family now value more than ever the pluralism and safety across faiths that this country provides.

[Nigel Adams]

My hon. Friend speaks with great knowledge and passion on all these matters and is right to raise this issue. I will speak to my ministerial colleague, Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, who I know has a close relationship with the high commissioner. I am sure that this matter has been raised, but on behalf of my hon. Friend and his constituents, I will ensure that Lord Ahmad has a meeting with the high commissioner shortly.

Global Britain

Richard Graham Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2020 Commons Chamber

[Dominic Raab]

I know that the hon. Gentleman follows these things carefully. Of course, the article in the EU-Canada agreement to which he refers is a hortatory recognition of the importance of strong labour laws; it is not legislative high alignment. That is precisely the kind of approach that the UK would take.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

What I hope we can still call the Prime Minister’s tour de force this morning laid out clearly that he did not believe we needed any further treaties or institutions to cover security, foreign and defence issues, but to avoid any misunderstanding will the Foreign Secretary confirm that agreement on data protection is going to be vital, not only for security issues but for wider service export interests? We currently have a considerable service surplus in our trade with the EU.

[Dominic Raab]

My hon. Friend is right that data is important. We are, of course, looking at the data adequacy process. Given the high level and high standards of UK regulation and laws in this regard, we are confident that, whatever approach we agree on in relation to the deal, we will be able to secure it in order to safeguard data-sharing both among businesses and individuals, but also, as he says quite rightly, in relation to law enforcement and wider areas of security.

UK Telecommunications

Richard Graham Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2020 Commons Chamber

[Dominic Raab]

I have never had any conversation where that linkage has been made, and nor am I aware of any.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

I welcome this statement, which balances the advantages of world-class telecoms technology with the need to manage complex challenges from high-risk vendors, and I think the Government’s acceptance of the restrictions and regulations proposed by the National Cyber Security Centre should give us all confidence. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, contrary to some media reporting, rather than this decision setting us on a collision course with the US, in fact the UK will be working very closely with US and other Five Eyes partners to develop alternative technologies over the next few years?

[Dominic Raab]

My hon. Friend is right about the challenge we face, but there is also an opportunity, specifically for, but not limited to, the Five Eyes partners, to look at this and see what challenges we face in the future—not just now—and to work collaboratively with business and within government to make sure we never find ourselves in this position again.