This week the Chinese Government took the decision to ban the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, of which I am a member, from visiting Hong Kong. The Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into UK-Hong Kong relations 30 years on from the Sino-British Joint Declaration. This agreement, signed in 1984, provided for the transfer of sovereignty from the UK to China, in return for a Chinese undertaking to protect Hong Kong's traditional liberties. Yesterday the Foreign Affairs Committee was granted an emergency debate on this unprecedented situation. This is the speech I gave to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker. The Chinese Government have said that my Committee has no business being in Hong Kong. They are wrong on three counts. First, legally. The United Kingdom has a treaty obligation to the people of Hong Kong, to which the People’s Republic of China is also a signatory. This is very much our business. The Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 is lodged with the UN and commits China to maintain the Hong Kong way of life until 2047. Until that treaty expires, we have a duty to ensure the Chinese are meeting their obligations, both to us as co-signatories and to the people of Hong Kong as beneficiaries of the Joint Declaration. China has shown that it is committed to upholding the international order and places great emphasis on the principle of national sovereignty. But by undermining a treaty, signed with another sovereign state and registered with the UN, they are undermining the very international order to which they claim to belong. The second reason they’re wrong to exclude us is that it’s counterproductive. My Committee is not just looking at the Joint Declaration but considering UK-Hong Kong relations as a whole. The UK and Hong Kong have extremely close ties of history, culture and commerce. Other members have spoken eloquently on the first two, so I will confine my remarks to the third. We are Hong Kong’s eleventh biggest trading partner, over 560 British companies operate there and the region accounts for 35 percent of all UK investment in Asia. This year a record number of Hong Kong students - over 4000 - received offers to study at British universities. As a major financial centres, we cooperate closely on issues of global financial governance. And of course we both have a key role to play in helping China internationalise their currency, the renminbi. So this is a time when we should be deepening and strengthening that relationship, because all parties have so much to gain. We should be over there, meeting with businesses and universities, asking what more can we do to increase our mutual prosperity. Instead we are here, debating the question of whether China is ready to be a responsible member of the international community. The third reason this ban is wrong is that it’s misguided. The Chinese Government have decided that they don’t like our conclusions before we’ve even had a chance to make them. It means they won’t get a chance to tell their side of the story, and it also means they won’t see a House of Commons Select Committee in action. This is a shame because if they saw what we do, the Chinese might find our Committee system could have a useful application within their own government. Independent committees with the power to hold public bodies to account could go a long way towards tackling China’s corruption problem, for example. But rather than a lecture, this inquiry could have been a genuine exchange of ideas. For we in this House, especially the party opposite, have a lot to learn from Hong Kong about what can be achieved when you back business and get behind free markets. Mr Speaker, Hong Kong is one of the best examples we have that Britain has been a force for good in the world. We signed the Joint Declaration because we believe in the rule of law, free speech and individual rights. With the important exception of representative democracy, Hong Kong is a living embodiment of our values. For that reason alone, we have a clear and legitimate interest in the future of the region. We do not seek to tell the Chinese how to run their country, but rather to ensure that they are holding up their side of an international agreement, an agreement which has been of great benefit to them. If we cannot be there in person what we can do is send a message to the people of Hong Kong that this House believes in your aspirations, shares your commitment to liberty and the law and calls on your government to safeguard your way of life in line with its international obligations. This week the Chinese Government took the decision to ban the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, of which I am a member, from visiting Hong Kong. The Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into UK-Hong Kong relations 30 years on from the Sino-British Joint Declaration. This agreement, signed in 1984, provided for the transfer of sovereignty from the UK to China, in return for a Chinese undertaking to protect Hong Kong's traditional liberties. Yesterday the Foreign Affairs Committee was granted an emergency debate on this unprecedented situation. This is the speech I gave to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker. The Chinese Government have said that my Committee has no business being in Hong Kong. They are wrong on three counts. First, legally. The United Kingdom has a treaty obligation to the people of Hong Kong, to which the People’s Republic of China is also a signatory. This is very much our business. The Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 is lodged with the UN and commits China to maintain the Hong Kong way of life until 2047. Until that treaty expires, we have a duty to ensure the Chinese are meeting their obligations, both to us as co-signatories and to the people of Hong Kong as beneficiaries of the Joint Declaration. China has shown that it is committed to upholding the international order and places great emphasis on the principle of national sovereignty. But by undermining a treaty, signed with another sovereign state and registered with the UN, they are undermining the very international order to which they claim to belong. The second reason they’re wrong to exclude us is that it’s counterproductive. My Committee is not just looking at the Joint Declaration but considering UK-Hong Kong relations as a whole. The UK and Hong Kong have extremely close ties of history, culture and commerce. Other members have spoken eloquently on the first two, so I will confine my remarks to the third. We are Hong Kong’s eleventh biggest trading partner, over 560 British companies operate there and the region accounts for 35 percent of all UK investment in Asia. This year a record number of Hong Kong students - over 4000 - received offers to study at British universities. As a major financial centres, we cooperate closely on issues of global financial governance. And of course we both have a key role to play in helping China internationalise their currency, the renminbi. So this is a time when we should be deepening and strengthening that relationship, because all parties have so much to gain. We should be over there, meeting with businesses and universities, asking what more can we do to increase our mutual prosperity. Instead we are here, debating the question of whether China is ready to be a responsible member of the international community. The third reason this ban is wrong is that it’s misguided. The Chinese Government have decided that they don’t like our conclusions before we’ve even had a chance to make them. It means they won’t get a chance to tell their side of the story, and it also means they won’t see a House of Commons Select Committee in action. This is a shame because if they saw what we do, the Chinese might find our Committee system could have a useful application within their own government. Independent committees with the power to hold public bodies to account could go a long way towards tackling China’s corruption problem, for example. But rather than a lecture, this inquiry could have been a genuine exchange of ideas. For we in this House, especially the party opposite, have a lot to learn from Hong Kong about what can be achieved when you back business and get behind free markets. Mr Speaker, Hong Kong is one of the best examples we have that Britain has been a force for good in the world. We signed the Joint Declaration because we believe in the rule of law, free speech and individual rights. With the important exception of representative democracy, Hong Kong is a living embodiment of our values. For that reason alone, we have a clear and legitimate interest in the future of the region. We do not seek to tell the Chinese how to run their country, but rather to ensure that they are holding up their side of an international agreement, an agreement which has been of great benefit to them. If we cannot be there in person what we can do is send a message to the people of Hong Kong that this House believes in your aspirations, shares your commitment to liberty and the law and calls on your government to safeguard your way of life in line with its international obligations. This week the Chinese Government took the decision to ban the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, of which I am a member, from visiting Hong Kong. The Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into UK-Hong Kong relations 30 years on from the Sino-British Joint Declaration. This agreement, signed in 1984, provided for the transfer of sovereignty from the UK to China, in return for a Chinese undertaking to protect Hong Kong's traditional liberties. Yesterday the Foreign Affairs Committee was granted an emergency debate on this unprecedented situation. This is the speech I gave to the House. Thank you Mr Speaker. The Chinese Government have said that my Committee has no business being in Hong Kong. They are wrong on three counts. First, legally. The United Kingdom has a treaty obligation to the people of Hong Kong, to which the People’s Republic of China is also a signatory. This is very much our business. The Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 is lodged with the UN and commits China to maintain the Hong Kong way of life until 2047. Until that treaty expires, we have a duty to ensure the Chinese are meeting their obligations, both to us as co-signatories and to the people of Hong Kong as beneficiaries of the Joint Declaration. China has shown that it is committed to upholding the international order and places great emphasis on the principle of national sovereignty. But by undermining a treaty, signed with another sovereign state and registered with the UN, they are undermining the very international order to which they claim to belong. The second reason they’re wrong to exclude us is that it’s counterproductive. My Committee is not just looking at the Joint Declaration but considering UK-Hong Kong relations as a whole. The UK and Hong Kong have extremely close ties of history, culture and commerce. Other members have spoken eloquently on the first two, so I will confine my remarks to the third. We are Hong Kong’s eleventh biggest trading partner, over 560 British companies operate there and the region accounts for 35 percent of all UK investment in Asia. This year a record number of Hong Kong students - over 4000 - received offers to study at British universities. As a major financial centres, we cooperate closely on issues of global financial governance. And of course we both have a key role to play in helping China internationalise their currency, the renminbi. So this is a time when we should be deepening and strengthening that relationship, because all parties have so much to gain. We should be over there, meeting with businesses and universities, asking what more can we do to increase our mutual prosperity. Instead we are here, debating the question of whether China is ready to be a responsible member of the international community. The third reason this ban is wrong is that it’s misguided. The Chinese Government have decided that they don’t like our conclusions before we’ve even had a chance to make them. It means they won’t get a chance to tell their side of the story, and it also means they won’t see a House of Commons Select Committee in action. This is a shame because if they saw what we do, the Chinese might find our Committee system could have a useful application within their own government. Independent committees with the power to hold public bodies to account could go a long way towards tackling China’s corruption problem, for example. But rather than a lecture, this inquiry could have been a genuine exchange of ideas. For we in this House, especially the party opposite, have a lot to learn from Hong Kong about what can be achieved when you back business and get behind free markets. Mr Speaker, Hong Kong is one of the best examples we have that Britain has been a force for good in the world. We signed the Joint Declaration because we believe in the rule of law, free speech and individual rights. With the important exception of representative democracy, Hong Kong is a living embodiment of our values. For that reason alone, we have a clear and legitimate interest in the future of the region. We do not seek to tell the Chinese how to run their country, but rather to ensure that they are holding up their side of an international agreement, an agreement which has been of great benefit to them. If we cannot be there in person what we can do is send a message to the people of Hong Kong that this House believes in your aspirations, shares your commitment to liberty and the law and calls on your government to safeguard your way of life in line with its international obligations. http://emp.bbc.co.uk/emp/embed/smpEmbed.html?playlist=http%3A%2F%2Fplaylists.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk-politics-30212162A%2Fplaylist.sxml&title=PMQs%3A%20Zahawi%20quotes%20Shakespeare%20in%20Thornberry%20van%20question&product=news