British authorities are moving to remove video surveillance cameras manufactured by Chinese firms from government offices, citing concerns over national security and the potential for espionage. The development has been reported by Financial Times and other outlets, signaling a broader shift in how public institutions assess foreign-made security technology and its implications for public safety, privacy, and governance. The policy shift underscores a growing public debate about supply chain integrity and the risk that critical infrastructure could be exploited by external actors. In this context, the government is prioritizing risk assessment and resilience, aiming to reduce exposure to equipment that could be leveraged for sensitive monitoring or data gathering by foreign entities.
According to media coverage, cameras produced by Hikvision and Dahua, two prominent Chinese companies, have been in operation across a significant portion of the police estate, with estimates suggesting that roughly one third of police facilities could be affected by the transition away from these systems. The move is framed as a measured response to evolving security considerations and an effort to safeguard the integrity of law enforcement operations and citizen data. Officials have indicated that evaluations are ongoing and that any decisions regarding replacement technology will consider interoperability, cost, and the preservation of public safety capabilities, while also seeking to minimize disruption to routine policing activities. The objective, as stated by officials, is to shield vulnerable sectors from potential national security threats associated with certain foreign-sourced surveillance technologies .
Treasury Secretary Jeremy Hunt has asserted that the measures are about protecting essential national infrastructure and sensitive government functions from risks posed by foreign suppliers. The government is preparing a structured program to guide ministries through the process of identifying and removing Chinese-made video surveillance systems where appropriate. This approach reflects a broader policy framework aimed at enhancing resilience and ensuring that public sector operations remain secure in the face of evolving geopolitical tensions and security considerations, while also addressing concerns about the cost and complexity of transitioning to alternative systems .
Former British Security Secretary Tom Tugendhat has commented on related issues, noting that certain accusations about covert foreign police activities in the United Kingdom have prompted official responses from law enforcement and diplomatic channels. He has emphasized that the integrity of national security processes must be protected, and that any alleged clandestine operations would require careful scrutiny and transparent investigation. In this debate, Tugendhat highlighted that British authorities conducted checks into the activities of non-governmental organizations focused on human rights, such as Safeguard Defenders, to determine whether any such facilities operated under the guise of legitimate public or civil service operations. The overall message from officials is that safeguarding sovereignty and public trust is a priority, with appropriate steps taken when potential policy violations or security concerns surface .
Tugendhat also noted that the British side did not uncover evidence of illegal activities conducted by the People’s Republic of China at the facilities under review. Following conversations with the Chinese Embassy, the Foreign Office communicated a clear stance that such centers should not operate in the country in any capacity. There has been a subsequent response from Chinese diplomats indicating that certain operational centers were closed or suspended, signaling a willingness to engage in dialogue about the boundaries of legitimate diplomatic and security activities within the UK. The exchanges reflect a careful balance between safeguarding national security interests and maintaining channels for international cooperation on law enforcement and human rights issues, while avoiding any escalation that could complicate bilateral relations. The situation remains under close watch by policymakers, security professionals, and analysts who study how foreign technology and diplomatic actions intersect with domestic security frameworks .