To ask His Majesty’s Government what representations they plan to make to the government of China to seek the release of British citizen Jimmy Lai, following his sentence this morning to 20 years in prison.
My Lords, the UK condemns the prosecution of British citizen Jimmy Lai. As the Foreign Secretary said, 20 years is tantamount to a life sentence for a 78 year-old man. The Prime Minister raised this case with President Xi on his recent visit to Beijing. Following the sentencing, we will rapidly engage further. We are focusing on the action that will help Jimmy Lai the most: sustained engagement with China, making our case consistently and directly.
I thank my noble friend for that Answer. As she says, Jimmy Lai is 78 years of age, which means either he is going to die in prison or he will be virtually 100 by the time he comes out—not for terrorism, violence or killing people but for defending freedom of speech and indeed the democratic undertakings that we thought were given in 1997. Will my noble friend ensure that the Government of China know that there will be consequences for this imprisonment?
Yes. I thank my noble friend for putting it in that way, and I agree with her. The UK will continue to stand up for the people of Hong Kong. That is why the Home Secretary today announced an expansion of eligibility for the Hong Kong BNO route. Jimmy Lai should never have been imprisoned in the first place and he should be released immediately.
My Lords, the Chinese courts are totally under the control of the Chinese Communist Party, so I do not believe this timing to be accidental. It comes after the Government have gifted them their shiny new embassy, which then allowed the PM’s visit last week. He quite rightly raised Jimmy’s case during that trip, and this is now the response of the Chinese Government: a 20-year sentence, which I think represents a massive slap in the face. In response to the question from the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, on whether there will be consequences, the Minister replied yes. Can she tell us what those consequences will be?
I explained just now about the BNO passport holders—if the noble Lord knew anything about this at all, he would understand that that will be absolutely opposed by China—so we have already done that. We will continue to make the case, and we now have a better ability to do that than we had previously. I reiterate that the issue around the embassy was completely unconnected from this issue, and I remind him that formal diplomatic consent for the embassy was given in 2018 by the former Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson.
My Lords, Sebastien Lai, Jimmy Lai’s son, whom many in the House know, said this morning that he had not spoken to his father for five years and that he regarded this sentence—20 years, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, has said—on a 78 year-old British citizen as a death sentence. As we think about Jimmy Lai and the other pro-democracy advocates who are also incarcerated in CCP prisons inside Hong Kong, our thoughts and prayers will be with them and with his family. His only crime is journalism; his only crime is a belief in democracy; his only crime is free speech. Can the Minister tell us how we intend to co-ordinate international pressure among like-minded democracies to ensure that this travesty, which has been committed in the name of justice, is exposed for what it is and put right?
It is outrageous that Jimmy Lai has not had contact from his family—that is inhumane. We continue to argue that he should have that contact and consular assistance. The Foreign Secretary has spoken to Secretary Rubio about this, and noble Lords will know that President Trump intends to visit China later this year, so we will continue to raise this with all our allies and partners.
My Lords, the noble Baroness said that the Government are focusing on the action that will help Jimmy Lai the most; I have to say it is not easy to feel optimistic, given the progress made so far. Can the Minister bear in mind that we are a huge market for the Chinese? There is a trade deficit of over £40 billion for its goods, which are being sold virtually frictionless into our country. That is an area we should be much closer to leveraging, because all else seems to have failed.
How we use our trade relationship to exert this kind of pressure needs really careful consideration. It would be very easy to take measures that harm us but have no impact at all. We need to deploy those levers that we think will be most effective. This is a devastating day, with Jimmy Lai having been sentenced in the way that he has, but I can assure the noble Lord that we will consider every means that we need to.
My Lords, while I share the outrage expressed across the House about the prosecution and now the sentence, will my noble friend the Minister consider the possibility of a prisoner transfer? I understand we have some prison transfer arrangements with Hong Kong. Obviously, that is a transfer of a sentenced prisoner, but the priority must surely be to bring Mr Lai to the UK.
Our position is that Jimmy Lai should be released, and I would not want to make any comments on an issue as sensitive as that without knowing his family’s position. I understand why the noble Baroness makes that suggestion, but it really is up to his family to determine whether they think that is something they would like the Government to pursue. He should be released.
My Lords, I want to pick up on the strand of questioning from the noble Lord, Lord Alton, about concerted and collaborative international action. The noble Baroness will know that the previous Government set up the Media Freedom Coalition with 51 members, including the likes of Canada as a co-chair. Surely, now is the time not just to inject new energy into that coalition to issue a statement from those 51 countries collectively but also to recognise that representations individually from each of the 51 countries would be a very powerful diplomatic tool to exercise at this time.
That is an excellent suggestion. We are committed to the coalition, and I will take that back to the department. I thank the noble Lord for his continued constructive engagement with this.
Can the Minister assure us that the Government will send a message to the Chinese authorities that no senior Chinese officeholder will be welcome in this country until conditions for Jimmy Lai are improved or, preferably, until he is released?
He should be released and we should not have to take the steps that the noble Baroness suggests. On those sorts of issues we need to take a judgment based on our best understanding at the time of what would be in Jimmy Lai’s best interest. I do not think stopping all engagement would be conducive to release. My sense is that we have only just started engaging with the Chinese. We need perhaps to use the relationship we have already started to build and exert that. I understand why the noble Baroness makes that suggestion; we all want to see him released and are all considering every lever that we have in order to secure that.