China: Threat to UK Interests

China poses a series of national security threats, including on espionage, cyber-attacks, transnational repression and support for Russia in its war against Ukraine. We challenge China robustly in relation to all those threats. China is also our third-largest trading partner, and a country that we need to co-operate with on international issues, including trade and climate change.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for that answer. There is a rumour going round Whitehall that the Foreign Secretary is not the Foreign Secretary, and that the real Foreign Secretary is Mr Jonathan Powell. That could not possibly be the case, of course, because it would make a mockery of the ability to hold the Foreign Secretary to account. Can the Foreign Secretary demonstrate that she really is in charge by telling us the precise instructions that she gave Mr Powell before he met the Chinese Foreign Minister four days ago?

As the Prime Minister set out yesterday, in relation to China we need not just strong action on security and the economy in our national interest, but engagement. Since 2018, President Macron has visited China twice, and he is there again this week, and President Trump met President Xi in October and will visit China in April, yet until last November, there had been no UK leader-level meetings with China for six years under the Conservative Government. It is important that we engage with China on both security and the economy through our National Security Adviser, through the rest of the Government and through Ministers.

Last night, the Prime Minister said some tough things about China. He said:

“It’s time for a serious approach”

to the national security risk from China. The first opportunity to demonstrate that serious approach is on the planning application for China’s new super-embassy—complete, as we now know it is, with secret basement rooms. In her previous role, the Foreign Secretary wrote a letter in favour of the application, but given her new instructions from the Prime Minister, does she now agree that the application should be refused?

As the hon. Member will know, a planning process is under way; it is quasi-judicial, so I cannot cut across it. In January, as Home Secretary, I and the former Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), wrote a letter during the planning process, setting out a number of national security considerations that required resolution before a decision could be made. Further updates will follow on that. I can say to the House that national security has been, and continues to be, a core priority for the Government.

China clearly poses national security threats. It is also one of our largest trading partners and one of the biggest economies in the world, so does the Foreign Secretary agree that we should reject the binary choice between security and the economy, and the bluster from Opposition Members, and that we should instead focus on how to be strong on both national security and our economic interests?

My hon. Friend is right that we need to both strengthen our security against threats from China, including cyber-threats and issues around transnational repression and economic security, such as the supply of critical minerals across the world, and engage with China on issues around trade and climate change. That, frankly, is in our national interests, and we would be letting the country down if we did not engage on both security and the economy in our national interests.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Two weeks ago, the Security Minister came to the House to describe sustained efforts by China to infiltrate Parliament, and to announce that the security agencies were launching an espionage action plan, yet when Cabinet Ministers, including the Prime Minister and, today, the Foreign Secretary, are asked about Beijing’s super-embassy, with its extensive underground facilities in the heart of London, they hide behind the statement that the decision is quasi-judicial. No one seriously believes that; it is the most political decision that will be taken next week. Beyond the threat to our democracy, what signal does the Foreign Secretary think that approval of the super-embassy would send to Hongkongers in this country, who have escaped state-sponsored intimidation only to find that this Government are considering making it easier for Beijing to continue persecution in the UK?

I would just remind the hon. Gentleman of the due process in the planning system; I am sure that he and his party would be the first to complain if due process was not followed. The Security Minister has set out the important work that he is doing to co-ordinate a new counter-political interference and espionage action plan, and we continue to take action, through our police and security services, to tackle transnational repression. We will not tolerate any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas, especially in the UK.