THE SNP has called for a full and independent assessment on the decision to approve Huawei’s role in building the UK’s 5G network despite security fears.
John Nicolson was also critical of the “broken” Westminster system after the Tory UK Government bypassed elected MPs and set out the details of the key major security decision through an unelected peer.
The National Security Council, in a meeting chaired by the Prime Minister in Downing Street which lasted for less than 90 minutes, decided that “high-risk vendors” should be permitted to play a peripheral role in the network.
In a statement, Nicky Morgan – who resigned as an MP ahead of last month’s general election, but was appointed to the Lords in order to retain her Cabinet position – said the Chinese firm’s involvement would “not be at the expense of our national security”.
The Government has promised to legislate “at the earliest opportunity” to put the new guidance into law.
READ MORE: Poll shows 43% of Brits disagree with Huawei 5G network rollout
However, advice issued to telecoms operators by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) said such vendors should be barred from all safety-related and critical networks and locations including military bases and nuclear facilities.
Nicolson, the SNP MP for Ochil and South Perthshire, said that called for a review of the Government’s decision.
“The UK Government has made this decision regardless of its designation of the company as a ‘high-risk vendor’ and has stated that security and data concerns do not apply to Huawei’s role,” he said. “So the UK Government must now commit to a full and independent assessment of the infrastructure’s security once it has been established.
"The UK Government’s approach in setting out this key security decision has also once again highlighted the broken and undemocratic Westminster system on show, after bypassing elected MPs and instead revealing its decision through Baroness Morgan – who resigned as an MP at the last general election, bypassed the electorate, and was elevated to the House of Lords in order to keep her previous position as Culture Secretary.”
In its evaluation, the NCSC said that without Government intervention, commercial factors could cause the UK to become “nationally dependent” on Huawei within three years, which would be a “significant national security risk”.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: 'Very big security concerns' over Huawei 5G plan
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told MPs there would be no impact on the Five Eyes alliance – the partnership between the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
“I want to be absolutely clear that nothing in this review affects this country’s ability to share highly sensitive intelligence data over highly secure networks both within the UK and with our partners including the Five Eyes,” he said.
Donald Trump’s administration had lobbied against the UK allowing Huawei access as the US engages in a global struggle for influence with China.
Washington was informed of the Government’s decision only after it was announced, but Boris Johnson is expected to speak directly to the US president.
US politician Newt Gingrich tweeted that the UK’s decision is “a major defeat for the United States”.
The fifth generation wireless technology for digital mobile networks, 5G is expected to bring with it download speeds 10 times faster than what 4G currently offers.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here