Few phrases are more likely to get the blood of ministers going than the words ‘Urgent Question’. Today it was the turn of media minister Julia Lopez, who was summoned to the House to answer MPs’ queries about the sale of the Telegraph and The Spectator to RedBird IMI, an entity bankrolled by the United Arab Emirates.

The UQ was tabled in the name of Alicia Kearns, chair of the influential Foreign Affairs Committee, who asked Lopez what safeguards were in place to stop foreign state-owned companies buying up the British media. Lopez told the House that she could not offer any new information, but was there to listen to MPs’ views. She is being kept out of the loop in this quasi-judicial process, she added. But she went on to outline a few general principles, almost all of which are incompatible with letting the deal go ahead.

Lopez said she supports ‘a free media, not interfered with by government – or governments’. If so, how can you seriously consider letting governments actually buy newspapers? Newspapers, she said, are ‘able to project to the world what democracy, a plurality of views and debate truly mean’. But are publications really likely do so under the rule of UAE, where there is no democracy – and promoting such an ideal is either a crime or a career-ending mistake?

Defending freedom of the press, Lopez said, can be a cliché.

It’s something we repeat, automaton-like, in a way that risks complacency. But as I watch the actions of authoritarian states during these times of turbulence; as I see western democracies in a knot of angst over our own values and I see populations question if our values still matter – from the safety of these shores – I’m reminded of the need to make the case again. And again. And again.

She’s right about those authoritarian states: the Emiratis gave a 21-gun salute to Vladimir Putin when he visited last month and hailed him as a ‘dear friend’. So if she is concerned, ministers may think twice about selling critical democratic and national assets to the Russian President’s ‘dear friends’ (I write about this here).

And while Lopez cannot speak about the details of The Spectator and the Telegraph case…

… I can speak about media freedom – and the need for media to be separate from political and government interference.

I took this as a strong hint that the bid will be blocked. Yes, Lopez is being kept out of the decisions. She is unaware of any deliberations. But if the principles she articulated are upheld, the Emirati bid is doomed. If she wants the media free from ‘government interference’ then it’s best to stop foreign governments buying them in the first place – which ministers have the power to do. Any assurances about ‘editorial boards’ are absurd as they never work in practice (as all journalists know and as MPs pointed out in the debate). What organisation is genuinely independent of its actual owner? It’s a nonsense proposition.

Warming to the theme, Lopez went on to stress…

… the importance of a British voice: domestically and internationally. The pride we can feel in media institutions like those in the Telegraph Media Group. Some of which date back two centuries and which drove changes in this nation as profound as the Great Reform Act. And whose writers to this day ask questions of all of us with a rare inquisitiveness and preoccupation with truth.

She was presumably referring to The Spectator, which was set up in 1828 to campaign for the kind of democratic reform that is unthinkable in the UAE. Alicia Kearns pointed out that ‘you cannot separate sheikh and state’ in the UAE. She asked four questions:

1. Are there any democracies in the world that have allowed any of their national newspapers to be bought by authoritarian governments?
2. Will there be a national security investigation into the Emirati/RedBird deal?
3. Do ministers recognise that intervening in the Emirati purchase of a 15 per cent stake in Vodafone does set a precedent for intervention?
4. Will they extend the recently invented ‘defending democracy taskforce’ to ‘make sure we can protect our media’ from a future overseas bid?

As Lopez said, the purpose of the debate was not so much for her to answer but to allow MPs to make their concerns known: which they did. Jamie Stone, a Liberal Democrat MP, perhaps put it best when he remarked that ‘the mood of the House is that this is simply not on’.

The DUP’s Jim Shannon, asked what measures could be taken to ensure how the UAE, ‘a nation with completely different ideas’ about free speech would not ‘have the capacity to shape media narrative’. Lopez had no answer as there is no answer. John Whittingdale, who until recently was covering for Lopez as media minister, called for ‘a fundamental review of the media ownership regime’. The Media Bill, she replied, may handle that. Richard Foord, a Liberal Democrat, said that many UK universities had opened Emirati campuses: have they had any problems with free speech or expression? James Sunderland (Conservative) said newspapers ought to be regarded as critical national infrastructure ‘so how do we make sure we do not end up selling England by the pound?’ (Lopez said there are powers to stop any deal – although they have not been used to pause The Spectator deal. If this point was more widely known, I suspect it would have been debated more.)

Neil O’Brien feared that ‘RedBird IMI have control over the titles’ already. He’s wrong: a ‘hold separate’ order has been issued that prevents RedBird having the slightest bit of control over either of us, and we have two independent directors who are take this duty very seriously.

O’Brien also said ministers should have stopped the debt repayment that transferred the titles from Lloyds Bank back to the Barclay family (who have agreed to sell us and the Telegraph to Redbird if they get the chance). Lopez should have told O’Brien that no law can prohibit repayment of debt: the law only allows the pausing of asset disposals. And this power has been exercised in respect of the Daily Telegraph – but not of The Spectator. We are, for some reason, still subject to the hold separate order – perhaps because the DCMS thinks we’re part of the Telegraph group. We haven’t really been told what their thinking is.

So: what’s next? It is likely to take until March until Frazer, the Secretary of State, decides whether to order a Phase Two investigation from the Competition and Markets Authority. If she does then statistically there is a 20 per cent chance of the RedBird IMI deal being approved. That decision could take months: some of us fear the Tories may just let this drop and leave our fate to be decided by a Labour government. But today’s debate highlighted the national security case against letting authoritarian regimes buy critical and democratic assets – and the cross-party opposition to ever letting this happen.