Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Huawei decision 'like allowing KGB to build UK phone network' in cold war, says US senator - live news

Huawei’s UK office in Reading.
Huawei’s UK office in Reading. Photograph: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP via Getty Images

Afternoon summary

  • Leading Republicans in Washington have criticised the government’s decision. Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, said it amounted to a “major defeat” for the US. (See 12.38pm.) Tom Cotton, a Republican senator, described the decision as like allowing the KGB to build the UK’s telephone network during the cold war. (See 3.29pm.) Administration officials said they were “disappointed” by the move. (See 1.52pm.) But President Trump has not yet commented on it personally. He has been tweeting today, but not on this.
  • Sir Keir Starmer, the favourite in the Labour leadership contest, has said that if the SNP wins next year’s Holyrood elections, they will have a mandate to hold a second independence referendum. He was speaking on a visit to the Scottish parliament where he also said:

What I want to do is to make the case going into that election that actually neither the status quo nor independence is the right way forward. And what we need is - whether you call it federalism or much more meaningful devolution - a different constitutional settlement. That’s the argument I want to make. I’m here to discuss that with colleagues.

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

Mark Warner, the US senator and the ranking Democrat on the senate intelligence committee, has put out this statement about the UK’s Huawei/5G decision.

While I am disappointed by the UK’s decision to continue allowing insecure vendors like Huawei into their network, the United States remains committed to working with the UK and other key allies to build more diverse and secure telecommunication options that provide competitive alternatives to Huawei. Working together must be our priority in the coming months.

From my colleague Dan Sabbagh

From my colleague Heather Stewart

Jonathan Djanogly, a Conservative, says if there is a security breach, Huawei should have to pay the cost of having its own equipment replaced.

Raab says that in those circumstances a criminal offence would have been committed, not just a breach of contract.

Richard Drax, a Conservative, says he is “baffled” by this decision. He says he does not think there is a distinction between core and periphery in 5G.

Raab says he does not agree. He says there is a difference.

(That is what the National Cyber Security Centre says too. See 2.58pm.)

Raab says there was a risk that banning Huawei could trigger trade retaliation. But that is not why this decision was taken, he says.

Bernard Jenkin, the Conservative, says he does not necessarily welcome the decision, but he understands it. He says the government should set up a review to see what lessons can be learnt.

Raab says this has been a failure of government, and of Western governments. He says the government has set out plans to ensure that it does not find itself in this position again.

President Trump has sent out his first tweets of the day. But he is not saying anything about Huawei (so far). Instead he is complaining about Fox News being biased against him ...

Crispin Blunt, another Tory former chair of the foreign affairs committee, says the intelligence and security committee should consider this issue. And he says the government should tell the Chinese they expect reciprocity.

Raab says that is an important point about the relationship with China.

Tom Tugendhat, the Tory MP who chaired the foreign affairs committee in the last parliament, asks if the 35% cap covers the new market, or the existing market.

Raab says the government papers explain how the 35% cap works. It is roughly equivalent to existing market share, he says.

Labour’s Barry Sheerman says there are businesses who think their intellectual property is being stolen by the Chinese every time they put it on the internet.

Bob Seely, a Conservative, asks for an assurance that MPs will be able to debate on what constitutes a high-risk vendor. And he says non trusted vendors should be built out of the system.

Raab says there is already a definition of a high-risk vendor.

Updated

Liam Fox, the former Tory international trade secretary, asks if the concern in Washington is about the UK’s ability to mitigate the risks of Huawei, or about the UK sending a message to other countries about Huawei being acceptable.

Raab says the UK and the US start from a different place. He says the government asked Washington if it could propose an alternative. He says the Americans did not have an answer on that point.

This is from Jon Sopel, the BBC’s North America editor, on the Tom Cotton quote. See 3.29pm.

Labour’s Pat McFadden asks if at any point the US has linked this decision to the chances of the UK getting a trade deal.

Raab says the Americans have not done this to his knowledge.

Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, says he is “deeply disappointed” by this decision. He says defending in cyber networks is always a matter of catch-up. He says Huawei will always be in the periphery. Does Raab accept that China is a threat? And will the government try to drive Huawei out of the network for good?

Raab says it is important to assess the nature of the risk. The government is doing that.

He says an outright ban would be a “very blunt tool” to deal with a very specific problem.

Penny Mordaunt, the Conservative former defence secretary, says this decision is “regrettable”.

Updated

David Davis, the Tory former Brexit secretary, says Huawei should have been banned from the 5G network.

PM's decision 'like allowing KGB to build telephone network' in UK during cold war, says US senator

This is from the Telegraph’s Ben Riley-Smith. He is quoting Tom Cotton, a Republican senator from Arkansas.

Julian Lewis, a Tory former chair of the defence committee, says Huawei is not independent of the Chinese state.

Raab says the relationship between Huawei and the Chinese state has been central to the analysis of the threat it poses.

Dominic Raab is responding to John Nicolson.

He says an outright ban, of the kind proposed by the SNP, would not remove the firm from the British telecoms network, it would not encourage diversification of supply, and it would increase costs for business.

SNP says government should have blocked Huawei from 5G network

The SNP’s John Nicolson says the government has opted for the “cheapest, least secure option”.

He says using Huawei is not safe. Under Chinese law, firms have to cooperate with the state, she says.

He says, with 5G, the peripheral network communicates with the core. He says malware can be hard to detect. He says countries like Australia have chosen to block Huawei. That may turn out to be the right choice, he says. He says the UK government has taken the wrong choice.

Updated

Theresa May, the former PM, says she commends the government for this decision.

When she was PM, she was reportedly planning to come to the same decision on Huawei and 5G.

She says it is essential that five eyes partners work with the UK to ensure that there is more market diversification, so that in future governments are less reliant on Huawei.

Raab commends May for the work on this issue that took place when she was PM.

Raab is responding to Thomas-Symonds.

He says intelligence sharing will not be put at risk, and never will be. High risk vendors have never been involved in intelligence networks, and never will be, he says.

And Andrew Parker, head of MI5, has said that he does not think intelligence sharing with the US will be at risk from this decision.

Updated

Thomas-Symonds says a rush by the government to throw itself into the arms of President Trump to get a trade deal must not govern everything it does.

He says the UK has had to choose between just three 5G vendors. What can be done to ensure more are available, he asks.

He says 5G will be transformational. It will shape the economy of the future, he says. But the government first said the UK would be a global leader in this in 2017, he says.

He asks Raab to explain how there won’t be a risk to communication channels used for intelligence.

He asks for an explanation of the difference between core and periphery in 5G. (See 2.58pm for an answer.)

And he asks when the new regulations will be brought to the Commons.

Nick Thomas-Symonds, a shadow Home Office minister, is responding for Labour. He says there has been too much “dither and delay”. This decision should have been made earlier, he says.

Raab says there will be nothing in the plans that will stop the government sharing highly-classified intelligence, either within the UK or with five eyes intelligence partners (ie, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand).

Dominic Raab's Commons statement on Huawei/5G decision

Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, is making a Commons statement about the Huawei/5G decision.

He says the government will do nothing to undermine UK security, or the security of its allies.

He says the UK has conducted the best analysis of what needs to be done to keep 5G secure. And he says it has a better understanding of the threat posed by Huawei than any other country, he says, because it has been monitoring Huawei already for years.

Summarising the review published by the National Cyber Security Centre (see 12.32pm and 2.58pm), he says the planning to introduce what will be among the stronger regulations for 5G in the world.

He says the government will legislate to limit the role of Huawei in 5G. And it will take steps to ensure that there is more diversity in the market, so that the government in future is not so dependent on Huawei.

He sums up some of the factors that will be taken into account when deciding if a 5G suppliers is high risk.

Updated

Here is a question from BTL (below the line).

User avatar for NotAtThisTime

Andrew,

In a recent R4 interview former Australian PM Tony Abbott suggested that the structuring of 4G and 5G is fundamentally different; that 4G has a core that can be ring fenced for security whereas 5G did not. Is there anything to substantiate that perspective? I appreciate that this is not a question on politics as such but the defences advanced by those supporting Huawei getting the contract suggest mitigation is still both possible and effective.

I’m afraid I don’t have the technical knowledge to answer that, but Ian Levy, technical director at the National Cyber Security Centre, does understand this stuff and he was written a blog today explaining the risk that “high-risk vendors” like Huawei pose to the 5G network, and what can be done to mitigate the risk. It is intended as a simplified version of the report published today by the NCSC. (See 12.32pm.)

In the blog Levy specifically covers the claim that there is no distinction between core and non-core in 5G. He says:

Claim 2. There’s no distinction between core and edge in 5G

This is covered in the previous blog, so I’m not going to delve into huge detail here, but it remains untrue. In previous networks, sensitive functions were grouped together in a couple of locations we called ‘core’. In 5G they are spread out a bit more, but sensitive functions are still sensitive functions and you can put your arms round them – for example, we list them in the guidance published today. Remember, in 5G you need lots of smaller basestations as well as big ones, and the small ones will be on lampposts, bus shelters and other places that aren’t secure from physical interference by bad guys.

So, if your network design means that you need to run really sensitive functions processing really sensitive data (i.e. core functions) on an edge access device on top of a bus stop, your choice of vendor is the least of your worries and you probably shouldn’t be designing critical national infrastructure. The international standards that define what a 5G network actually is allow you to do all sorts of things, and some of those things could lead to security or operational risks that can’t be mitigated. That doesn’t mean you have to do them.

Updated

This is from Sean Spicer, who was press secretary to President Trump during Trump’s first six months in office.

Labour criticises government for failing to develop 'home-grown alternatives to Huawei'

Tracy Brabin, the shadow culture secretary, has issued this statement on the Huawei decision on behalf of the Labour party.

The Tories refused to take our technological sovereignty seriously and failed to invest in home-grown alternatives to Huawei. As a result they’re in the ludicrous position of having to choose between the UK’s security concerns and our infrastructure needs.

Despite years of dithering, the government still can’t tell us how it will restrict Huawei’s access to sensitive parts of the network. It must now give specific reassurances to workers and businesses that a 35% market cap will not stop 5G becoming widely available by 2027, as planned – and that it will support communities whose access to 5G will be delayed by this decision.

The statement does not say what a Labour government would have done faced with the same dilemma. Instead it makes a version of the time-honoured opposition argument: “We wouldn’t have started from here.”

Updated

From CNN’s national security correspondent Kylie Atwood

'Wrong, dangerous and grave, shortsighted mistake' - US congresswoman on PM's Huawei decision

Here is some more US reaction to the Huawei decision. This is from Elise Stefanik, a Republican congresswoman from New York.

Industry leaders have said the salary threshold recommended in the report from the migration advisory committee - £25,600, not £30,000 as previously proposed - is still too high.

The Food and Drink Federation, whose members rely heavily on EU citizens to staff food production sites including meat processing factories, unattractive to many British workers, said this was “a step in the right direction” but urged the government to “consider going further still by adopting the ‘growing rate’ system outlined.

EU nationals currently make up a quarter of the 430,000-strong workforce in food and drink manufacturing and many businesses will be recruiting under immigration rules for the first time, said the FDF.

London First, which represents some of the capital’s biggest employers, said the MAC could have gone further and proposed a £20,000 threshold, which “would have ensured we could keep the economy at full strength”, it said.

The Federation of Small Businesses said: “FSB research shows that four-in-five small employers that hire staff into jobs classed as mid-skilled do so into roles with salaries less than £30,000. This includes positions in sectors such as engineering and IT.”

And Universities UK said it remained concerned about its post-Brexit ability to recruit lab technicians, language assistants and other researchers from the EU even with the proposed salary threshold. “We are also concerned that standard salary levels in higher education sectors would no longer be recognised, meaning it will be harder to attract international talent into key lecturer roles,” Alistair Jarvis, its chief executive, said.

Updated

EU to start talks with UK on post-Brexit relationship on 3 March

Turning away from Huawei, negotiations on the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU will start on 3 March, my colleague Daniel Boffey reports.

Here is an analysis of the Huawei decision from Dan Sabbagh, the Guardian defence and security correspondent.

Nick Timothy, who was co-chief of staff to Theresa May when she was prime minister until the 2017 general election, has criticised the Huawei decision.

From the BBC’s security correspondent Gordon Corera

According to a YouGov poll, members of the public are more likely to be against using Huawei to build the 5G infrastructure than in favour by a margin of three to one.

But almost half of the public do not have a view, the poll also suggests.

And this is from Steve Baker, the Tory backbencher, on the Huawei decision.

By “this seems to be happening”, he means he is commending the government for stressing what it is doing to mitigate the Huawei risk, he says.

Tom Tugendhat has now posted an eight-part thread on Twitter explaining some of his concerns about the Huawei decision.

And here is his conclusion.

Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative MP who chaired the foreign affairs committee in the last parliament, and Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader, were two of the backbenchers most critical of Huawei when MPs debated the issue in the Commons yesterday afternoon. Now the decision has been formally announced, they have restated their opposition to the plan.

These are from LBC’s Theo Usherwood and ITV’s Daniel Hewitt.

Huawei has welcomed the UK government’s decision. This is from its vice-president, Victor Zhang.

Huawei is reassured by the UK government’s confirmation that we can continue working with our customers to keep the 5G roll-out on track.

This evidence-based decision will result in a more advanced, more secure and more cost-effective telecoms infrastructure that is fit for the future.

It gives the UK access to world-leading technology and ensures a competitive market.

We have supplied cutting-edge technology to telecoms operators in the UK for more than 15 years.

We will build on this strong track record, supporting our customers as they invest in their 5G networks, boosting economic growth and helping the UK continue to compete globally.

We agree a diverse vendor market and fair competition are essential for network reliability and innovation, as well as ensuring consumers have access to the best possible technology.

Updated

Boris Johnson's Huawei decision 'major defeat' for US, says leading Republican

Newt Gingrich, a leading Republican and a former Speaker of the House of Representatives, has described Boris Johnson’s Huawei decision as “major defeat” for the US.

Jeremy Wright, the former culture secretary, told BBC News that he thought Boris Johnson’s decision on Huawei was a “sensible compromise”.

Here is the 30-page report (pdf) from the National Cyber Security Centre containing its analysis of security threats to the telecommunications sector. It has been published today alongside the announcement.

And here is its conclusion.

Our threat analysis highlights that our telecoms sector is potentially vulnerable to a range of cyber-risks. This analysis is backed up by evidence generated from security testing of telecoms networks and by security incidents. In this paper, we have outlined the NCSC’s approach to assessing the cyber risk to the telecoms sector, and our recommendations for reducing and managing this risk. While the risks are complex and interlinked, the NCSC has identified that it is feasible to manage these risks and by doing so, increase confidence in the telecoms services on which the nation relies.

Updated

Morgan says Huawei will be excluded from 'most sensitive networks' as it gets 5G go-ahead

Here is a statement from Nicky Morgan, the culture secretary, about the Huawei/5G decision. She said:

We want world-class connectivity as soon as possible but this must not be at the expense of our national security. High-risk vendors never have been and never will be in our most sensitive networks.

The government has reviewed the supply chain for telecoms networks and concluded today it is necessary to have tight restrictions on the presence of high-risk vendors.

This is a UK-specific solution for UK-specific reasons and the decision deals with the challenges we face right now.

It not only paves the way for secure and resilient networks, with our sovereignty over data protected, but it also builds on our strategy to develop a diversity of suppliers.

We can now move forward and seize the huge opportunities of 21st century technology.

Here is her news release in full.

And here is a written ministerial statement from Morgan to peers giving more details of the government’s plans to legislate to limit the involvement of so-called “high-risk vendors” like Huawei in the 5G network.

Nicky Morgan leaving No 10 after this morning’s national security council meeting.
Nicky Morgan leaving No 10 after this morning’s national security council meeting. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Updated

Huawei/5G decision - Full details

Here is an extract from the culture department news release.

Ministers today determined that UK operators should put in place additional safeguards and exclude high-risk vendors from parts of the telecoms network that are critical to security.

High-risk vendors are those who pose greater security and resilience risks to UK telecoms networks.

The prime minister chaired a meeting of the national security council (NSC), where it was agreed that the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) should issue guidance to UK telecoms operators on high-risk vendors following the conclusions of the telecoms supply chain review.

This advice is that high-risk vendors should be:

• Excluded from all safety-related and safety-critical networks in critical national infrastructure

• Excluded from security critical ‘core’ functions, the sensitive part of the network.

• Excluded from sensitive geographic locations, such as nuclear sites and military bases.

• Limited to a minority presence of no more than 35% in the periphery of the network, known as the access network, which connect devices and equipment to mobile phone masts.

As part of the review, the NCSC carried out a technical and security analysis that offers the most detailed assessment in the world of what is needed to protect the UK’s digital infrastructure.

The guidance sets out the practical steps operators should take to implement the government’s decision on how to best mitigate the risks of high risk vendors in 5G and gigabit-capable networks.

The government will now seek to legislate at the earliest opportunity to put in place the powers necessary to implement this tough new telecoms security framework.

The government is certain that these measures, taken together, will allow us to mitigate the potential risk posed by the supply chain and to combat the range of threats, whether cyber-criminals, or state-sponsored attacks.

The review also highlighted the need for the UK to improve the diversity in the supply of equipment to telecoms networks.

The government is now developing an ambitious strategy to help diversify the supply chain. This will seek to attract established vendors who are not present in the UK, supporting the emergence of new, disruptive entrants to the supply chain, and promoting the adoption of open, interoperable standards that will reduce barriers to entry.

The recommended cap of 35% will be kept under review to determine whether it should be further reduced as the market diversifies.

Today’s decision marks a major change in the UK’s approach that will substantially improve the security and resilience of our critical telecoms networks. It will see the government roll out the most stringent set of controls ever – including new standards with tough underpinning legislation to raise the security and quality of the entire 5G and gigabit-capable networks.

Updated

Boris Johnson gives green light for Huawei 5G infrastructure role

Here is my colleague Heather Stewart’s story about the Huawei announcement.

This is how it starts.

The Chinese state-owned tech firm Huawei has been designated a “high-risk vendor” but will be given the opportunity to build non-core elements of Britain’s 5G network, the government has announced.

The company will be banned from the “core”, of the 5G network, and from operating at sensitive sites such as nuclear and military facilities, and its share of the market will be capped at 35%.

“We are clear-eyed about the challenge posed by Huawei, which we today confirm is a high-risk vendor,” said a Whitehall source.

But the source insisted a “market failure” meant there was little alternative in the short term.

The government Huawei announcement is out.

More details soon ...

This morning Christopher Pincher, a Foreign Office minister, has been attending an EU general affairs council meeting in Brussels. It is the last scheduled EU meeting that a British minister will be attending while the UK remains a member. As he arrived Pincher said that he would deliver the message that “as we leave the EU we will always be allies, partners and friends”. He said:

I’m here to reassert to my EU friends and colleagues that, though we are leaving the EU, we are not leaving Europe.

Our shared history, our shared values, our commitment to security and prosperity continue as equals - sovereign equals.

Here are some of the more interesting articles and tweets on the Huawei/5G story that I’ve seen this morning.

  • Gordon Corera, the BBC’s security correspondent, explains the dilemma facing the government in a blog. Here’s an extract.

The US has taken a hard line because it knows the UK decision has global significance.

Many other countries are going through similar debates right now. Like the UK, they would like to use Huawei because it is cheap but fear the security risks and the wrath of the US.

If the UK approves the use of Huawei many of them may use that as cover to follow suit. Few others though have the technical experience of monitoring Huawei that the UK has built up.

The global perspective goes to one of the wider long-term risks.

Some people ask how we have got to a position where we are needing to even consider using Chinese technology.

The answer is because Western countries failed to think strategically about protecting or nurturing their own full spectrum telecoms industry over the last two decades.

Companies went bust or were taken over. Meanwhile Beijing pursued a focused long-term strategy to become a leader in the technology.

What No. 10 really thinks: My colleague Annabelle Dickson reports this is ultimately a trade-off that Downing Street is prepared to make. She says today’s big decision on Huawei reflects the new strategic thinking inside No. 10, where senior officials prioritize potentially revolutionary advances in technology over the marginal gains of increased transatlantic trade. “Former ministers and officials who are familiar with the mind-set of Johnson and his top adviser Dominic Cummings say privately that modern tech infrastructure is much more important to the pair’s vision for the U.K.’s future economy than trade with the U.S., welcome as a quick deal would be,” she reports.

Read the quotes: “If you are Dom and the PM, you know in 10 years we want to be a high-tech Silicon Valley across the whole of the U.K.,” says one government official who has worked closely with both men. “We need high-speed internet across the country to do that. That is more important than getting slightly cheaper meat.” The official continues: “While trade deals are a Tory MP obsession … Dom would come from the school of thought that the point of trade deals and leaving the EU is to make your own domestic market more dynamic and more responsive.”

Imagine the situation the other way round. Would China allow a British or American company to get itself near the heart of its secret systems? Of course not. The Huawei case is actually worse than that, because whereas British or American companies have independent lives of their own, a country like China does not. Huawei is an arm of the Chinese state, and Beijing would never allow it otherwise. That state remains, despite all the reforms, a one-party, totalitarian system.

Indeed the present condition of the Chinese Communist party seems to be reverting in its leadership cult, its ultra-secrecy and its hostility to exterior powers to the mindset of the Chairman Mao era.

The headlines just now are all about the dangers of the coronavirus coming out of China. The Huawei virus will infect us much more widely and far longer if we let it.

  • Mike Butcher, editor-at-large at TechCrunch, has posted a Twitter thread on the story. It starts here.

Here are his conclusions.

  • And this is from the BBC’s technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones.

Here is the full text of the migration advisory committee’s report (pdf). It runs to 278 page.

There is also an annex (pdf) running to 103 pages.

Nearly 80% of Conservative party members oppose letting Huawei build 5G, survey suggests

According to a survey for ConservativeHome, almost 80% of Conservative party members think the government should ban the Chinese firm Huawei from playing a role in the 5G network. ConservativeHome surveys are normally seen as reliable guide to opinion in the party.

Survey of Conservative members
Survey of Conservative members Photograph: ConservativeHome

Boris Johnson is in such a strong position with his party, having just won the election with a near-landslide, that he can afford to take a decision opposed by almost four out of five of his party members. But it is unusual for a prime minister to have quite so little support from the membership on a major policy decision. It is all very well having political capital in the bank, but once you start using it up, the stock does diminish.

National security council meets to decide on Huawei's role in building 5G network

Ministers are in Downing Street now for the national security council meeting that will decide whether Huawei can build the UK’s 5G network. Here are some of the arrival pictures.

Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, with Nick Carter, chief of the defence staff, arriving at No 10.
Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, with Nick Carter, chief of the defence staff, arriving at No 10. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA
Nicky Morgan, the culture secretary.
Nicky Morgan, the culture secretary. Photograph: Peter Summers/Getty Images
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary.
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary. Photograph: Peter Summers/Getty Images
Mark Spencer, the chief whip.
Mark Spencer, the chief whip. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

US senators urge UK to keep Huawei out of its 5G network

According to the Washington Post, three Republican senators have written to the British national security council urging them not to let Huawei play a role in building the UK’s 5G infrastructure. In their letter Marco Rubio, Tom Cotton and John Cornyn said:

This letter represents a genuine plea from one ally to another. We do not want to feed post-Brexit anxieties by threatening a potential US-UK free trade agreement when it comes to congress for approval. Nor would we want to have to review US-UK intelligence sharing.

The facts on Huawei are clear. We hope that your government will make the right decision and reject Huawei’s inclusion in its 5G infrastructure.

The suggestion that, if the UK refuses to block Huawei, congress may block the proposed UK-US trade deal was also made by the former Trump adviser Tim Morrison in an interview yesterday.

But these interventions from Washington do not seem to be working. The NSC is meeting this morning, and it is expected to approve Huawei playing some role in the 5G roll-out. Boris Johnson implied as much yesterday.

Here are the latest figures on Labour leadership nominations from @CLPNominations, a respected Twitter account.

Migration committee advises against full points-based system for UK

Here is my colleague Amelia Gentleman’s story about the migration advisory committee’s report.

And this is how her story starts.

The independent migration advisory committee does not recommend a full shift to an Australian points-based system in research giving the first detailed insight into how a reformed immigration system might look after Brexit and the ending of freedom of movement for EU nationals.

In a report published on Tuesday, the independent committee, which provides research-based advice to the government, recommends a mixed system, which would rely on a minimum salary threshold for those people coming to the UK with a job offer, and a points-based system for those coming to the UK without a pre-arranged job.

“Talented individuals” would be able to apply for a work visa under the points-based system.

Its recommendations would reduce levels of immigration, the size of the UK population and total GDP. “We expect the changes to very slightly increase GDP per capita, productivity and improve public finances, though these estimates are more uncertain,” the report states.

The migration advisory committee is recommending that the post-Brexit immigration salary threshold should be cut from £30,000 (the level proposed by the government when Theresa May was PM) to £25,600, the BBC’s Norman Smith reports.

At this stage in the electoral cycle (just after a big election win for the governing party, and with the opposition in the middle of a leadership election), opinion polls don’t count for much. But if you do want to know what the polls are saying, the Times’ Matt Chorley has the latest figures from YouGov.

'Get Ready for Brexit' campaign had little effect, says watchdog

Boris Johnson’s government spent £46m on a “Get Ready for Brexit” campaign in October, but demonstrated little evidence it left the public better prepared, Whitehall’s spending watchdog has found. My colleague Rajeev Syal has the full story here.

Labour says government claim to be reversing Beeching rail cuts 'meaningless'

Boris Johnson and his ministers want to improve regional connectivity, in particular rail travel in the north of England, and today Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, is announcing outline proposals to reopen two rail lines: the Ashington-Blyth-Tyne Line in Northumberland, and the the Fleetwood line in Lancashire. As with the government plans for “40 new hospitals”, there is no firm commitment to go ahead with the work; just a seed-funding commitment to explore the idea. My colleague Gwyn Topham’s story about the plan is here.

As a relatively minor transport announcement, that’s fine, but Shapps is facing criticism today because he is presenting this as part of a plan, first announced during the general election campaign, to reverse the 1960s Beeching cuts that closed more than 4,000 miles of track and more than 2,000 stations (in the era when mass car ownership was taking off, making rail less competitive). Shapps first floated this idea during the general election campaign.

In a highly crowded field, this was seen as one of the most misleading tweets of the general election, because it implied that the Beeching cuts might to totally or largely reversed, when in fact £500m would only pay for a few miles of new track. The government is still giving that impression today. The press release from the Department for Transport says Shapps is making an announcement that “will that will drive forward the reversal of the controversial Beeching cuts”.

Labour says today’s promise is “meaningless” without much more substantial investment. In a statement Andy McDonald, the shadow transport secretary, said:

The funding pledged by the government would reopen just 25 miles of railway.

The Conservatives claim to have been reversing Beeching cuts since 2017 despite not reopening an inch of track.

Investing in the railway is a fantastic policy but this is meaningless without a serious funding commitment of billions of pounds.

The timing of this announcement is also suspicious and seems designed to distract from the imminent collapse of the Northern rail franchise.

Later we will get a much more significant investment announcement from the government - the decision about Huawei.

Here is the agenda for the day.

Morning: Boris Johnson chairs a meeting of the national security council to decide whether Huawei will be allowed a role in building the UK’s 5G infrastructure.

10am: The migration advisory committee publishes a report on how an Australian-style points-based immigration system could work in the UK.

11.30am: Matt Hancock, the health secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

Afternoon: Ministers are due to make oral statements in parliament about the Huawei decision. Nicky Morgan, the culture secretary, is expected to make the statement in the Lords, but it is not clear yet who will address the Commons.

2.45pm: Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, chairs a meeting of the joint ministerial committee, which includes ministers from the devolved administrations, in Cardiff to discuss Brexit.

3.35pm: Lord Berkeley, former deputy chair of the Oakervee review of HS2, gives evidence to the Lords economic affairs committee.

As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary when I wrap up.

You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe roundup of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Elijah Wood finally reading Lord of the rings
Elijah Wood has finally started reading the Lord of the Rings books - 27 years after he started working on the spin-off movies.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Your Steak Isn't Killing the Planet
Some climate activists want a meat-free future. The science says otherwise.
Reason
Reason
‘Haters gonna hate’: Netflix hits back at claims they’re simplifying plots for second-screen viewing
Streaming service execs have finally commented on infamous rumours
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Doja Cat: I have to defend my creative choices
Doja Cat has explained why she engages with trolls on social media.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
HSTikkyTokky Demands Public Apology from Piers Morgan Within 24 Hours After Finding Wife's 'Shocking Posts'
Influencer HSTikkyTokky demands a public apology from Piers Morgan after a heated interview on 'Piers Morgan Uncensored', involving controversial Instagram posts.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Ellen DeGeneres Accused in Bizarre 'Chess Prodigy' Story—The Truth Behind the Viral Horror Claim
A viral story alleging a young chess prodigy witnessed disturbing behavior backstage at The Ellen DeGeneres Show is spreading online, despite lacking verifiable evidence.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play