Labour dismisses ‘smears’ over Chinese spy case as top Tory calls defence ‘absurd’
A senior minister has dismissed accusations that the Labour government deliberately collapsed the Chinese spy case as being a “whole series of baseless smears.”
Security minister Dan Jarvis told parliament that the previous Conservative government’s failure to clarify definitions in the Official Secrets Act of 1920 led to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropping a Chinese spy case surrounding Christopher Berry and Christopher Cash.
In a statement before MPs, Jarvis said the current government’s policy approach towards China had had no bearing on witness evidence supplied for the case before it was dropped, with a senior civil servant – the deputy national security adviser – being given “full freedom” to provide information to the court.
“The national security adviser [Jonathan Powell] was not involved in any decisions around the substance of the evidence,” Jarvis told parliament.
“That means he made no decision about the content of any evidence relating to the case itself.”
Tory grandee Iain Duncan Smith was scathing of the minister’s explanation, and the notion that the deputy NSA acted entirely alone in determining what evidence was provided to the CPS.
“Isn’t it the role of the national security adviser that they are involved in all matters of substance when it comes to national security?” he asked. “What’s the point of a national security adviser who does not involve themselves in matters of national security, as in this case?
“Instead we are meant to believe that the Deputy national security adviser is allowed in this case to involve themselves in substantial matters of national security but not apparently to discuss these substantial matters of national security with the national security adviser.”
“This does seem to me to be an absolute matter of substantial absurdity.”
In response to questions from Tory leader Kemi Badenoch over whether the Labour government had interfered with the prosecution’s key evidence and how he would respond to criticism from former prosecutors and intelligence chiefs, Jarvis said: “I am genuinely really sorry that she has taken the opportunity to make a whole series of baseless smears this afternoon.”
Questions linger over the case
Jarvis’ comments may not fully clarify why the CPS director of public prosecutions Stephen Parkinson claimed in a letter he had sought evidence from the government over “many months” to proceed with the case.
They also do not directly respond to suggestions that prosecuting spies became easier following case law changes in the trial of Bulgarian spies operating in the UK, with Jarvis claiming prosecutors’ decision to drop charges against Berry and Cash was independent.
Both Berry and Cash have denied allegations they were spies for China.
Several reports have suggested that Jonathan Powell, the national security adviser, and Treasury officials, intervened in the case to allow for trade relations with China to be maintained and that a decision was made to prevent evidence from being offered labelling China a “threat”.
Powell is set to face MPs in a private hearing in the coming weeks after returning from a diplomatic trip in the Middle East.
Tugendhat slams Labour’s Jonathan Powell
But Tom Tugendhat, the former security minister who chaired the hawkish China Research Group, which employed Cash, said Labour special adviser Powell should face questions in public view.
“I think it’s personally very odd that the national security adviser is not appearing openly before a committee, and I think it’s very odd that the national security adviser is a special adviser,” Tugendhat told City PM on Monday.
Tugendhat also argued that it was “simply not credible” that Keir Starmer was not responsible for the collapse of a “major national security trial” given he oversaw the civil service and was the First Lord of the Treasury.
“The idea that he’s not in some way responsible would be, frankly, bizarre.”