WATCH: Patel denies being ‘on the warpath’ over Huawei

She says discussions are taking place about a decision, but that claims in today’s papers aren’t accurate.

Margot James: The evidence available does not support a total ban on Huawei

There would seem to be a difference between the rhetoric coming out of the US and the implementation of policy.

Tom Tugendhat: Huawei’s human rights record needs scrutiny before 5G contracts are signed

We must not put public money into the pockets of a company accused of abetting the most egregious human rights abuses in the modern world.

WATCH: Johnson 3) “The British public deserve the best possible technology,” he says of Huawei

“I don’t want, as UK prime minister, to put in any infrastructure that is going to prejudice our national security.”

Bob Seely: Why the Government should listen to our allies and say: no way, Huawei

The blunt reality is that China is a cyber risk and will remain so for years. It has a dreadful reputation for cyber attacks and intellectual property theft.

A UK-US trade deal. Never mind the economics (at least for a moment). Feel the politics.

As with the NHS, policing, immigration and stop & search, so with trade. The Prime Minister will want a quick win – or at least progress towards one.

Robert Halfon: Does May’s selfish machine care at all about the Party’s future – or the thousand plus councillors who lost their seats?

We are heading towards a 1997-type defeat unless we make fundamental and radical changes to our machinery and to our policies.

Our snap survey. The panel backs Williamson over May – up to a point.

A plurality clearly think that her charge against him of leaking National Security Council discussions is unproven – if not unjustified altogether.

Iain Dale: The Williamson I got to know

I found an incredibly likeable person – but although he knuckled down and scored some successes, he was better placed as Chief Whip than Defence Secretary.

Risking our security. Risking our alliances. Opening our infrastructure up to China is a risk too far.

There are no certainties – at least, until it’s too late – so the UK should err on the side of caution.

Williamson. He’s gone away – but he won’t shut up.

What’s that you say?  That what really matters is the Huawei decision itself?  Quite so.  And on that, we have an uncomfortable feeling that he’s right. 

The former Defence Secretary’s side of the story. Sedwill “was out to get him”.

His friends say that the two clashed from the beginning of the Defence Secretary’s appointment – and suggest a vendetta.

Yes, you did. May is “concerned by the manner in which you have engaged with this investigation”. Her letter.

The implication of the letter is that the former Defence Secretary withheld evidence from Mark Sedwill’s leak inquiry.

No, I didn’t. Williamson “strenuously” denies that he was in any way involved in this leak”. His reply.

“I am confident that a thorough and full enquiry would have vindicated my position.”

Williamson fired over Huawei leak. May has “lost confidence” in him. Downing Street’s statement.

“The Prime Minister’s decision has been informed by his conduct surrounding the investigation.”