National Security Bill — Clause 28 — The foreign power condition — 3 May 2023 at 14:15

“knows, or ought reasonably to know”

“the government’s reassurances that journalism will not be criminalised under this new national security regime.”

“publish a policy statement to ensure the identification of donations from a foreign power”.

“as a result of this Act”.

“the proper exercise of a function of the armed forces”

“The UK Government does not participate in, solicit, encourage or condone unlawful killing, the use of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment...or extraordinary rendition. In no circumstance will UK personnel ever take action amounting to torture, unlawful killing, extraordinary rendition, or CIDT.”

“the intention of the Government that the ISC should have oversight of substantively all of central Government’s intelligence and security activities to be realised now and in the future.”––[Official Report, Justice and Security Public Bill Committee, 31 March 2013; c. 98.]

“We see the Chinese authorities playing the long game in cultivating contacts to manipulate opinion in China’s favour-seeking to co-opt and influence not just prominent Parliamentarians from across the political landscape, but people much earlier in their careers in public life, gradually building a debt of obligation.”

“a Chinese businessman linked to an alleged Chinese secret police station in London has attended Chinese Communist party political conferences, is linked to the united front work department and has organised Tory party fundraising dinners and attended events with Conservative Prime Ministers.”-[Official Report, 19 April 2023; Vol. 731, c. 248.]

“Enhanced due diligence and risk assessment processes would help campaigners identify foreign money, identify potential proceeds of crime, and establish a culture of ‘know your donor’ within parties-similar to the ‘know your customer’ approach, encouraged through Anti-Money Laundering regulations for the financial sector.”

“These requirements could be introduced in a way that recognises the need for proportionality”-

“with different requirements depending on the size of a regulated entity’s financial infrastructure, or the size of a donation, to prevent the checks becoming a disproportionate burden on smaller parties and campaigners.”

“The rules that are supposed to prohibit foreign donations-in the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000-are riddled with loopholes which enable foreign money to be channelled to political parties and MPs through lawful donors.”

“parties and non-party campaigners should have appropriate procedures in place to determine the true source of donations. Parties and campaigners should develop a risk-based policy for managing donations, proportionate to the levels of risk to which they are exposed”.

“is that in recent times the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament has not been used for the purpose for which it was set up.

If the Government are not going to use the Intelligence and Security Committee properly, they should save money and abolish it. But, of course, they will not do that because Parliament set it up, Parliament thinks it is important that this House and the House of Commons should have some insight into intelligence operations, and it would be unacceptable for the Government to abolish it. But they must choose either to abolish it or to use it properly. If they are to use it properly, they must update the memorandum of understanding and, as the noble Lord, Lord West, said, use it for the purpose for which Parliament intended: to give oversight by people who are fully screened within the ring of secrecy to report to Parliament. I think this is a much more important amendment than the face of it suggests.”-[Official Report, House of Lords, 7 March 2023; Vol. 828, c. 745-46.]

“the intention of the Government that the ISC should have oversight of…all of central Government’s intelligence and security activities to be realised now”-

“and in the future”-[Official Report, Justice and Security Public Bill Committee, 31 January 2013; c. 98.]

“The ISC is the only committee of Parliament that has regular access to protectively marked information that is sensitive for national security reasons: this means that only the ISC is in a position to scrutinise effectively the work of the Agencies and of those parts of Departments whose work is directly concerned with intelligence and security matters.”

“This will not affect the wider scrutiny of departments such as the Home Office, FCO and MOD by other parliamentary committees. The ISC will aim to avoid any unnecessary duplication with the work of those Committees.”

“any aspect of its functions”.

“in relation to an alleged offence that relates to conduct involving-

(a) torture or inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment, or

(b) the violation of a person’s sexual integrity.”

“potentially admissible before the ICC”-

Debate in Parliament |