Dan Jarvis MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 18 Nov 2025 · China Espionage: Government Security Response · Hansard source

  More

  Let me reiterate what I said previously about how completely unacceptable it is that any transnational repression takes place in this country. The Government will continue to stand with and support members of the Hong Kong community who have relocated here to the UK. My hon. Friend is right to raise the important work done by the Speaker’s Conference. At the most recent meeting of the defending democracy taskforce, we looked carefully at the recommendations. A lot of positive work has been done, and we want to work closely with Mr Speaker to deliver where we can on the recommendations. My hon. Friend is also right to raise the importance of the online environment, and these are conversations that I am having with colleagues across Government, including in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. On her point about a meeting, she will understand that that particular piece of legislation is a Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government lead, but I will make sure that she gets a meeting with the relevant Minister, whether that is myself or a colleague in the other Department.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Official Secrets Act: Alleged Breach · Hansard source

  More

  As set out on multiple occasions in this House, no Ministers and no special advisers played any role in the provision of evidence. The Director of Public Prosecutions has confirmed that publicly.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Official Secrets Act: Alleged Breach · Hansard source

  More

  This was an independent decision by the CPS, and we have repeatedly made clear that there was no political interference in the evidence provided. This Government are extremely disappointed with the outcome of this case, and remain concerned about the espionage threat posed to the UK. We are working relentlessly to counter it.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Department is committed to reinvesting criminal proceeds into asset recovery and tackling related economic crime. In 2024-25, £174 million supported law enforcement, including through the ARIS top slice, a multi-year fund that is ringfenced for core and innovative capabilities. We are reviewing ARIS with stakeholders to improve stability and effectiveness. I know that my hon. Friend is engaging with the noble Lord Hanson of Flint, but I would be very happy to discuss this matter with him further.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Everyone deserves to feel safe and to be able fully to participate in public and political life, free from the threat of violence or exclusion driven by hateful prejudice. We will persist in our efforts to challenge extremist narratives, disrupt the activity of radicalising groups and directly tackle the causes of radicalisation. Alongside our work to tackle extremism, the defending democracy taskforce is driving forward a whole-of-Government response to the full range of threats we face to our democracy.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises an important point. The assessment of the terrorist threat to the UK is made independently by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre. Government partners, including JTAC, the National Protective Security Authority and counter-terrorism police, work closely with industry to ensure that the latest threat picture is appropriately responded to by owners of CNI. I am happy to discuss that further with him.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  Simply because a number of Departments were represented at this meeting, as would normally be the case.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I am just going to make a bit of progress. Let me be clear about two things right from the start. First, we would not be discussing this here today had the outdated Official Secrets Act 1911 been replaced sooner. Secondly, it is the responsibility of the CPS and the DPP to bring criminal prosecutions and compile evidence. The statements submitted to the JCNSS confirm that, as does the evidence that the Joint Committee heard yesterday from the Cabinet Secretary and the DNSA. We have been consistently clear that no Ministers and no special advisers interfered in the provision of evidence under this Government.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  The Liberal Democrats spokesman, the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), offered his service as a marriage guidance counsellor. I would advise him not to give up his job.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I say to the right hon. Gentleman—whom I hold in high regard, not least for the work that he did on the ISC—that I can give him the assurances that he seeks. I can also assure him and the House how seriously this Government take the challenges that we face from countries right around the world. Let me return to the DNSA’s evidence. As his written evidence makes clear—this is an important point that the House will want to note—from the moment the DNSA’s witness statement was submitted, he was a fully bound witness in criminal proceedings. His evidence had not yet been heard or tested in court, so his witness evidence could not be and was not shared, and this was later confirmed by the CPS. In this debate and in recent weeks, there have been a number of different, and at times conflicting, claims about this Government’s involvement in the case, and I want to address those claims directly today. At the DNSA’s request, the word “enemy” was removed from the first witness statement during the drafting process, because it did not reflect the Government’s policy at the time. The DNSA made amendments to ensure that his witness statement text reflected his assessment of the strongest elements of the evidential material provided by Counter Terrorism Policing, by demonstrating that the information that was alleged to have been provided was prejudicial to the safety or the interests of the UK. When CTP approached the DNSA to write a supplementary statement in November 2024, he was specifically asked to comment on whether China posed an active threat to the UK’s national security during the period of 31 December 2021 to 3 February 2023, and to confirm whether that remains the position at the time of writing. That is why paragraph 6 of the second statement references part of the current Government policy towards China.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to make a bit of progress, because time is against me. Meetings such as this are a routine part of the National Security Adviser’s role of co-ordinating Departments across Government.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  Let me just finish my point. I will come back to the right hon. and learned Gentleman if time allows. The meeting was specifically set up to provide the FCDO with an opportunity to discuss—at an appropriately senior official level; no Ministers attended the meeting—what the approach would be to handling engagement with China across a range of scenarios related to this case, as well as in relation to wider issues that would come up. Those who attended the meeting were operating on the basis that the trial would go ahead at the start of October.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  Yes.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  As the hon. Gentleman knows—I think I may have even said this to him previously, and certainly to the House—China presents a series of threats to the Government. I will say a little bit more about that. As time is short, I want to focus on the DNSA and the evidence that he has given, because that is important for the House. The DNSA confirmed to the JCNSS yesterday that he used language from an answer to a parliamentary question in his third statement, in which he provided the current Government’s position as context, as had been requested. The DNSA’s third statement was written in a way that ensured consistency with his first two statements. For the sake of clarity, I will say it again: the current National Security Adviser had no role in either the substance of the case or the evidence provided. There has been misreporting, speculation and fabrication about the officials’ meeting that the National Security Adviser chaired on 1 September—the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) mentioned it just a moment ago. I can tell him and the House that a meeting of senior officials took place on 1 September to discuss the UK’s relationship with China. The meeting was specifically set up to provide—

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  The Government have given a very clear commitment that we will co-operate and work closely with all of the Committees of this House. It is precisely because everything this Government do is rooted in the national interest that I say that this Government are extremely disappointed that this case has collapsed. It is right that the matter is being investigated by the appropriate parliamentary Committees, and we look forward to co-operating with that work. Question put .

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. and learned Gentleman served in a Government a number of years ago. I can give him an assurance that this Government work collaboratively across Government with other Departments, and therefore it seems to make perfect sense that other Departments would be represented at such a meeting. I will try to reflect some of the points that have been made in this debate, including the point from the shadow Home Secretary, who asked specifically about the Home Secretary. I can tell him and the House that no Minister—no Minister in this Government—was involved in any aspect of the production of evidence.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I begin by thanking the Opposition for bringing forward this Opposition day debate, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart) for moving this motion, and the shadow Home Secretary for his remarks. As I have repeatedly set out to the House, the Government are extremely disappointed that this case will not be heard in court. I also share Members’ concerns about the threats that we face from espionage.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger) nailed the myths, I thought very effectively, in his contribution. The right hon. and learned Member for Torridge and Tavistock (Sir Geoffrey Cox) described his duck. It felt as if his contribution was as much aimed at the DPP and the CPS as at the Government, but it was engaging none the less. My hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) raised important points about some of the critiques that have been levelled, and I agree with him about trying to establish cross-party consensus. The right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green spoke about the nature and the description of the threats we face from China. Let me say to him that it is completely unacceptable that he and other Members of this House are sanctioned, and I give him an absolute assurance of the seriousness with which this Government take those particular threats. My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) spoke about transnational repression. He has raised it previously, and I can tell him that the defending democracy taskforce has concluded a review, and the Government have developed a range of support and security mechanisms. Most importantly, however, we condemn any malign activity towards anyone here in the UK. The right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) spoke about the work of the ISC, and he was right to do so. The Government welcome the work of the ISC in looking carefully at the circumstances of this case, as we do the important work of the JCNSS. I thought my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) made the really important point that, given the concerns that have rightly been expressed right across this House about what has happened, we should be trying to seek to work together and establish a consensus. I thought he made that point very powerfully. Time is running short, so let me say to the House that national security is the first duty of this Government. That is why we oppose the Opposition’s motion, which would see the release not only of information subject to legal professional privilege, but of information vital to the security of the United Kingdom, including advice to the Prime Minister. Successive Governments, including the previous Government in which the shadow Home Secretary served as a Minister, have maintained that position. This is not a question about parliamentary scrutiny. We welcome the ongoing process with the JCNSS, and we look forward to continuing to work with it, as we do with the ISC. This Government will continue to develop a consistent and pragmatic approach to economic engagement, but without compromising our national security.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to make a bit of progress, because time is against me. Meetings such as this are a routine part of the NSA’s role.

• 23 Oct 2025 · United Kingdom Security Vetting · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend will know better than anyone that Barrow makes a critical contribution to national security. I can assure her that UKSV continues to undertake a programme of work to improve the efficiency of the vetting process and that further work is ongoing to digitise and improve the automation of processes. If she has any further concerns, I would be happy to discuss them with her.

• 23 Oct 2025 · United Kingdom Security Vetting · Hansard source

  More

  The Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that UKSV delivers a security clearance process that is efficient and fit for purpose. Security vetting clearances are being processed within agreed timescales, and UKSV performance is monitored monthly. It is working to ensure that demand for vetting is forecast better.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that he does in co-chairing the crypto and digital assets all-party parliamentary group. Financial services are integral to our mission for economic growth, and we are absolutely committed to creating the right conditions for a vibrant, competitive and innovative financial services sector. That is why the Government are proceeding with proposals to create a new financial services regulatory regime for cryptoassets.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. We absolutely recognise the impact that the loss of communication services can have on constituencies like hers. The Cabinet Office is responsible for the co-ordination of resilience and crisis management across Government, and I have seen at first hand the diligence and professionalism of crisis teams in Cobra. I would be more than happy to discuss this matter with my hon. Friend further, and to represent her concerns to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Strengthening National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  I am slightly struggling to make the connection with resilience, Mr Speaker, but I am very happy to respond—

• 23 Oct 2025 · Strengthening National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  The Government routinely conduct and update assessments on a whole range of threats. On gov.uk, the Government publish the outcome of those assessments in the national risk register and in their chronic risks analysis, including on climate change, biodiversity loss and the impact on our ecosystems.