Latest news with #IntelligenceandSecurityCommittee
The Herald Scotland
4 days ago
- General
- The Herald Scotland
Al Qaida terrorists tried to poison UK water supply, says ex-security minister
It follows the publication of comprehensive military plans to safeguard the UK in the face of threats from Vladimir Putin's Russia and China. Sir Keir Starmer said the strategic defence review (SDR), published earlier this week, would create a 'battle-ready, armour-clad' nation. The move comes against the backdrop of ongoing concerns about the vulnerability of critical national infrastructure to attack. Pressed in Parliament over whether there had ever been an attempt or a plan uncovered to contaminate the UK's water supply, environment minister Baroness Hayman of Ullock said: 'My understanding is that there has not been such an incident, but that does not mean that we should be complacent. 'We know that our water and energy infrastructure are both potentially vulnerable to hostile attacks.' But moving to correct his frontbench colleague, Lord West, who served as Home Office minister for security and counter-terrorism from 2007 to 2010, said: 'In 2008 there was an attempt by eight al Qaida operatives to poison north London water supplies. 'I am pleased to say that our agencies worked brilliantly to stop it happening.' Lord West of Spithead sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (David Mirzoeff/PA) The former Navy chief, who sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, added: 'As a result, in the Home Office we put in hand a whole series of work on police response times, indicators of where the outflows from reservoirs went and new barriers. 'Where has all that work gone? These things somehow seem to disappear. There should be some reports, and hopefully someone did something about it.' Responding, Lady Hayman said: 'That is extremely interesting and very helpful of my noble friend. I will certainly look into it, because it is an important point.' Earlier, the minister told peers: 'The Government's first duty is to protect our national security and keep our country safe. 'Defra (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) recognises that the drinking water supply is a potential target for hostile actors. 'It works with water companies and partners across Government to understand and monitor threats to water supply and to consider responses as appropriate to protect the security of our water system.' But Labour peer Lord Harris of Haringey, who is chairman of the National Preparedness Commission, said: 'I wonder whether her department is being a tad complacent in talking simply about monitoring the threat rather than looking at what practical arrangements can be made. 'For example, how do we deal with a drone which is flown over a reservoir and deposits something in there? 'The panic effects of that being known to have happened and not necessarily knowing what the substance is would be enormous.' Lady Hayman said: 'Tackling the diverse range of state threats – not just drones but many other threats – requires a cross-government and cross-society response. 'We need to draw on the skills, the resources and the remits of different departments and operational partners. 'In Defra, we work closely to look at the threats and the appropriate levels of response, specifically drawing on expert advice from the National Protective Security Authority, the National Cyber Security Centre and the Home Office, as well as carrying out threat assessment with policing partners.' Former Metropolitan Police chief Lord Hogan-Howe, who led the UK's largest force from 2011 to 2017, said: 'For about 15 years, I have been worried about the water supply – the large and small reservoirs, the pipes that connect them and, of course, the water treatment plants. 'I worry that there is sometimes confusion between the Home Office, Defra and others about who is looking after security.' The independent crossbencher added: 'It needs to be higher in the priorities than it presently appears.' In reply, the minister said: 'I can assure him that we discuss these matters with the Home Office. 'One thing that we have been trying hard to do in Defra and other departments since we came into government is to work better across Government.' The Home Office has been contacted for comment.
Telegraph
27-04-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Force universities to reveal China donations, urges Labour peer
A public register of Chinese donations to British universities must be created, the chairman of Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee has said. Lord Beamish issues the call in a Telegraph article almost two years after the committee first made the recommendation to the Education Department. In his article, Lord Beamish warns the Government not to be 'naive' about Chinese influence in British academia and emphasises the need for 'transparency'. Lord Beamish, who served as a Labour MP for 23 years and was Gordon Brown's veterans' minister, has intervened after a public debate about the scale of Chinese influence in the UK following the Government's takeover of Chinese-owned British Steel earlier this month. The move triggered a diplomatic spat with Beijing, with the Chinese embassy in the UK accusing some MPs of showing 'arrogance', 'ignorance' and a 'twisted mindset'. Lord Beamish writes: 'An urgent reassessment is also needed of the collaboration between UK universities and China. Not an outright ban but an assessment and government intervention where such partnerships pose a risk to our national security. 'The public register of Chinese donations to UK universities recommended by the Intelligence and Security Committee in its report must also be enacted. Having total transparency on Beijing's funding connections to UK academia is essential for us to understand the full scale of influence. We must not be naive here.' The intervention follows up recommendations made in the committee's 220-page report on China that was published in July 2023. It was produced when Sir Julian Lewis, the Conservative MP, was chairman. One of the recommendations read: 'The UK Government must ensure that transparency around the source of foreign donations to higher education institutions is improved: a public register of donations must be created by the Department for Education and monitored by the State Threats Unit in the Home Office.' It is understood there has been no sign in private from the Education Department that it intends to take up the recommendation. A spokesman for the department declined to comment when approached by The Telegraph. The report spelt out a host of concerns about Chinese influence in British academic institutions. Another part read: 'Academia is also an 'easy option' when it comes to the theft of intellectual property, by taking advantage of collaborative projects to steal information which is less protected than it might be in the private sector or the Ministry of Defence, for example. 'The vast number of Chinese students – particularly postgraduates – in academic institutions in the UK that are involved in cutting-edge research must therefore raise concerns, given the access and opportunities they are afforded.' Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves, who took office last July, have publicly outlined a willingness to engage more with China despite the challenges. Ms Reeves, the Chancellor, used an interview with The Telegraph earlier this month to push back on the idea being pressed by Donald Trump and his allies of disengaging with China. She said: 'China is the second-biggest economy in the world, and it would be, I think, very foolish, to not engage. That's the approach of this Government. I was in China earlier this year as part of an economic and financial dialogue. I had with me some of the biggest UK financial services firms, so HSBC, the London Stock Exchange group, Standard Chartered, Prudential. 'We were there to improve the ability of the UK financial services firms to operate out of China. Getting more licences, more quotas for British businesses and a deal that I think was worth something like £600 million for the UK economy. 'And those sorts of arrangements are clearly in the UK national interest. And that's how I will approach trade talks or financial dialogues with any country in the world.' We need our eyes wide open to understand rules China plays by By Lord Beamish The recent controversy regarding the Chinese ownership of British Steel has brought into public focus the question of Chinese control of key parts of the UK economy. But this is not a new debate – it formed a major part of an Intelligence and Security Committee report on China published in July 2023. It is also not new to government. In its opening paragraph, the report reproduced the Joint Intelligence Committee's assessment on China from 2019 that said: 'There is effectively a global values struggle going on in which China is determined to assert itself as a world power.' It goes on to say that China represents a risk on a pretty wide scale to UK interests. China is the world's second-largest economy and the UK's third-largest trading partner. This has been achieved by China's 'whole state' approach. Chinese state-owned companies and private enterprises work to the state's national goal of economic supremacy. Alongside this, Chinese academia and state security structures work to the same plan: to make China the number one world economic power by 2049, the centenary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. China has the world's largest set of security services whose aim is to maintain the supremacy of the Communist Party and promote China's interests globally. In the UK, the debate about economic prosperity is often viewed as separate from our security interests. This separation over the last decade has led to the problems we see today facing British Steel. In the golden era of China/UK relations in the Cameron years, a blind eye was turned to security concerns in the search for economic prosperity. There was also a fundamental ignorance of the economic facts about China's approach. China claimed to be embracing free-market capitalism but was doing the opposite, using state subsidies and, in some cases, forced labour to get a dominant position in certain sectors and driving out Western competitors. This economic battlefield across the world is littered with the corpses of now defunct companies, from telecoms to manufacturing, as a result of this approach. Chinese investment was welcomed, including in our civil nuclear sector. No sector seemed out of bounds. Alongside this, because of cuts in government funding to our universities, there was an explosion of Chinese students at UK universities and key research tie-ups with some of our best-known universities. So where does this leave us today? It could be argued that because of past decisions we are more vulnerable than others. China hawks advocate we should cut our economic and cultural ties with China as the only logical response. This is not possible or desirable. China is a global economic power that we cannot ignore. The on-shoring of all manufacturing lost to China would not be possible or make economic sense. What is needed now is a clear assessment by the Government of what industries we deem as critical to our economic security. This cannot be left to wait for more examples like British Steel to arise. We need an industrial strategy that looks across sectors to identify those industries important to our national security. UK sovereign capability in the manufacture of drinking straws is obviously not one but the protection of components and IP for our nuclear industry is. This may also mean working with like-minded allies and will need direct government intervention. With the National Security and Investment Act, the Government has the powers to intervene to stop critical industries falling into the hands of China or others we see as a threat to our interests. It must be used proactively. Ministers must also listen and act on the assessments given to them by our security services, even when these may conflict with the short-term economic interests of the UK. An urgent reassessment is also needed of the collaboration between UK universities and China. Not an outright ban but an assessment and government intervention where such partnerships pose a risk to our national security. The public register of Chinese donations to UK universities recommended by the Intelligence and Security Committee in its report must also be enacted. Having total transparency on Beijing's funding connections to UK academia is essential for us to understand the full scale of influence. We must not be naive here. The UK retreating from doing business with China is not the answer but, if we are going to, we need to have our eyes wide open and understand the rules they are playing by. Only by doing this will we be able to protect our national interests and avoid future scenarios like the one that faced British Steel.
