UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Conservatives call on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to face MPs after the China spy case collapsed, accusing his government of failing to provide key evidence.
As reported by The Independent, Keir Starmer faces pressure to explain himself in Parliament after the failed trial of suspected Chinese spies.
The chief prosecutor accused ministers of withholding evidence. This prompted calls from Conservatives for Mr Starmer to answer questions in Parliament.
Mr Starmer said the case fell apart because the previous Tory government had not classified Beijing as a threat when the alleged incidents occurred.
The director of public prosecutions, Sir Stephen Parkinson, said the Crown tried for months to get essential evidence from the government, but it was not provided.
The prosecution of Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry under the Official Secrets Act was dropped on September 15.
Kevin Hollinrake’s views on Keir Starmer and the China spy case
Tory chairman Kevin Hollinrake said,
“Keir Starmer does need to explain himself to Parliament and to the country.”
The allegation was of “people spying at the heart of government, and we are not willing to say that China is a threat to our national security.”
Mr Hollinrake stated,
“It’s totally wrong and it is a pattern of behaviour for Keir Starmer when we’ve seen, for example, the Chinese super embassy in the heart of London, which is not in the interest of national security.”
He stressed that the previous Conservative government had always flagged China as a threat to national security in specific areas.
What did MPs plan regarding Keir Starmer and the China spy trial?
When the Commons returns from its conference break on Monday, MPs will demand answers from Keir Starmer.
Two MPs confirmed they plan to request an urgent parliamentary question on Monday, which Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle must approve amid concerns over the China case.
Mr Starmer, an ex-DPP, may not have to respond personally to any urgent parliamentary question.
Alicia Kearns’ stance on the collapse of the China spy case
Senior Tory MP Alicia Kearns, a former employer of Christopher Cash, called on ministers to come clean about the collapsed China spy case.
She added,
“The Government must come clean – who is responsible for spiking the prosecution? Continued stonewalling only invites further concern of concealment or conspiracy.”
How did the Lib Dem spokesman react to the failed China spy trial?
Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Calum Miller stated,
“It is shocking that a case against two men accused of acting on China’s behalf to acquire secret information from MPs has collapsed because Government ministers and officials have refused to confirm China is a menace.”
How did Stephen Parkinson explain the failed China spy trial?
In a letter to the Commons Home Affairs and Justice Committees, the DPP said the CPS had tried to gather further evidence. This followed a High Court ruling in a Bulgarian spy case, requiring prosecutors to show that China posed a national security threat.
Stephen Parkinson added,
“Efforts to obtain that evidence were made over many months, but notwithstanding the fact that further witness statements were provided, none of these stated that at the time of the offence China represented a threat to national security, and by late August 2025 it was realised that this evidence would not be forthcoming.”
He added,
“When this became apparent, the case could not proceed.”
What did Lord Macdonald say about the need for a statement on the China spy case?
Former DPP Lord Macdonald urged Attorney General Lord Hermer to appear in Parliament to explain the case once MPs return from the autumn recess.
He said,
“Everybody’s saying, you know, ‘I knew nothing about this. The decision was made by somebody else. No one consulted me. None of its my fault and I can’t explain it.’”
Lord Macdonald stated,
“The reality is, you simply cannot have a serious national security case collapsing without some proper explanation being given to the public. And the Attorney General Lord Hermer has to attend Parliament when Parliament returns from its recess to explain what has happened here.”
He added,
“The independence of the DPP and the prosecutor, of course, is crucial, although he will have required the Attorney General’s consent for this prosecution, and the Attorney General is a minister, and he’s entitled to consult with other ministers about the way they think the public interest lies.”
Keir Starmer’s views on the collapse of the China spy case
Sir Keir Starmer said the alleged offences occurred between December 2021 and February 2023, so the former Tory government’s China policy had to be considered.
At the time, the Tories refused to label China a threat, and the Prime Minister stated,
“You can’t prosecute someone two years later in relation to a designation that wasn’t in place at the time.”
Mr Starmer said,
“So this has to be the position of the last government, I’m not saying that defensively, because that was the last government.”
When asked if he blamed the CPS for the dropped charges, the Labour leader said, “not expressing a view one way or the other.”
What did Nick Vamos say about the collapse of the China spy case?
Nick Vamos, ex-head of CPS special crime, challenged the DPP’s explanation for the collapsed case.
According to him, the DPP’s reasoning is flawed because the Bulgarian spy case expanded the definition of “enemy.”
Mr Vamos said,
“Therefore, either the CPS did not have sufficient evidence to charge the defendants in the first place, or they misunderstood what they needed to prove.”
He added it remains “hard to fathom” why officials refused to confirm China posed a national security threat at the time of the alleged crimes.
What is the case against two men accused of spying for China in the UK?
Two British men, Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry, were accused of spying for China between late 2021 and February 2023. They allegedly provided information potentially useful to Chinese intelligence.
Both spies were charged under the UK’s Official Secrets Act in April 2024 for sharing information prejudicial to UK safety and interests.
The Chinese spies denied any wrongdoing. The case collapsed because the UK government had not officially labeled China a national security threat at the time, a requirement to prosecute under the law.
Key facts about the UK’s Official Secrets Act
The Official Secrets Act criminalizes the handling of information that could be useful to an enemy, requiring proof that the accused acted with a purpose harmful to the UK’s safety or interests.
It covers information on prohibited places and sensitive state secrets, legally presumed harmful if shared without authorization unless proven otherwise.
The law covers both direct and indirect usefulness to an enemy, including potential enemies. This reflects the serious nature of espionage threats to protecting national security today.
