Huawei: What have we done wrong?

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei says it is seeking an urgent meeting with ministers and officials after the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) blocked a proposal by Spark to use its equipment in a 5G mobile network.

Huawei’s New Zealand deputy managing director, Andrew Bowater, said it had not had ‘‘any formal notification or contact from the GCSB’’ and wanted the opportunity to ‘‘actively address any concerns and work together to find a way forward’’.

It was in the interests of ‘‘natural justice and fairness’’ that Huawei did have the opportunity to understand the Government’s position and get clarification on the process from here, Bowater said in a statement.

‘‘There has been no evidence of wrongdoing by Huawei presented and we strongly reject the notion that our business threatens New Zealand in any way.

‘‘We deserve the opportunity to have our voice heard.’’

Huawei had acted in good faith since it was established in New Zealand in 2005, he said.

‘‘We believe that our involvement in the telecommunications sector has benefited New Zealand’s economy, businesses and consumers.’’

The biggest potential impact of Huawei being blocked from supplying equipment would fall on consumers ‘‘in terms of technology and price due to the lack of competition’’, he said.

The GCSB’s director-general, Andrew Hampton, effectively confirmed a statement by Spark on Wednesday that it had declined a proposal by Spark to use Huawei equipment in a 5G mobile network that Spark aims to have in operation in 2020.

Without naming Huawei, the GCSB said it had identified ‘‘a significant network security risk’’.

The United States and Australian governments have placed blocks on Huawei competing for some business for several years, citing security concerns, but Huawei has attributed stance to protectionism.

Spark was yesterday still awaiting a full debriefing from the GCSB.

A ‘‘fact sheet’’ provided by the GCSB made it clear that the next step after that could be for Spark to explain how it could ‘‘prevent or mitigate’’ the risk the GCSB had identified.

If Spark did attempt to address concerns, the GCSB would then have to decide whether to refer the matter to the Minister responsible for GCSB, Andrew Little. the US