Keir Starmer publishes 18 pages of China spy case evidence

Mr Collins submitted one witness statement in 2023, with another two statements being filed earlier this year.

The documents were handed over in connection with the case against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry.

Mr Cash and Mr Berry, who both deny any wrongdoing, had been accused of passing secrets to Beijing and were charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024.

However, the Crown Prosecution Service unexpectedly dropped the charges against the two men last month.

The Director of Public Prosecutions claimed the case collapsed because evidence which referred to China as a national security threat could not be obtained.

As pressure mounted on the Prime Minister, Sir Keir pledged to reveal key details from the witness statements.

He also defended his Government's conduct amid growing concerns there had been a cover-up.

Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions earlier today, Sir Keir Starmer said: "Under this government, no minister or special adviser played any role in the provision of evidence."

However, in the now-released witness statements, Mr Collins said that Chinese intelligence services were “highly capable and conduct large-scale espionage operations” against the UK.

Mr Collins went on to admit that the UK was “committed to pursuing a positive relationship” with Beijing.

CHINA SPY SCANDAL - READ MORE:

• Keir Starmer accused of 'hiding overseas to dodge questions on China spy trial'
• White House issues stark warning to Britain amid China spy scandal
• Labour put on blast for 'dreadful c**k up' on China spy scandal while MI5 ramps up efforts to protect British politicians

Concluding one witness statement, the deputy national security adviser wrote: "For the reasons given above, it is my assessment that the suspects’ alleged activities were prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK, and the information and material passed would be directly or indirectly useful to the Chinese state."

The third and final witness statement was submitted to CPS chief Stephen Parkinson in an attempt to end a legal stand-off.

However, the CPS is believed to have claimed that the evidence was “five per cent less than the evidence threshold that was needed”.

Mr Parkinson told MPs last week that the case had been dropped because despite “many months” of efforts.

He added that the Government failed to provide evidence that “represented a threat to national security” at the time of the offence.

Sir Keir first read the witness statements from Mr Collins on Wednesday morning, Downing Street said.

However, No10 also admitted that the Prime Minister was informed that the trial was likely to collapse two days before the CPS publicly announced the decision to drop charges.

The decision to publish the documents also comes after a major row between Sir Keir's Government and the CPS.

“The statements were provided to us for the purpose of criminal proceedings, which are now over,” the CPS said.

“The material contained in them is not ours, and it is a matter for the Government independently from the CPS to consider whether or not to make that material public.”

National security adviser Jonathan Powell came under particular criticism after it was revealed that he had attended an internal Whitehall meeting to discuss the implications of the trial just days before it was abandoned.

While Sir Keir admitted that the meeting took place, the Prime Minister stressed Mr Powell did not discuss or see the evidence the Government submitted to the trial.

Earlier today, ex-No10 aide Dominic Cummings claimed that China had breached secure high-level systems involving Strap material and this had not been made public.

The claim has been denied by former senior cyber security officials working in Whitehall and the Cabinet Office.

A Cabinet Office spokesman said: “It is untrue to claim that the systems we use to transfer the most sensitive Government information have been compromised.”

Responding to the partial release of the China files, a Conservative Party spokesman said: "It is disappointing that it has taken significant pressure from Kemi Badenoch and the Conservative team to force this weak Prime Minister to publish this limited information - which falls short of what was requested.

"What has already been published shows the extent of the threat that China poses to the UK, and makes it all the more shocking that the Prime Minister knew of the imminent collapse of this trial, but did nothing to stop it.

“There are still many unanswered questions about this scandal - from the role of the National Security Adviser, to the potential involvement or knowledge of Ministers, and ultimately whether the Prime Minister or the Security Minister has misled the House of Commons throughout this process.

"We will consider this disclosure. But it is clear that this is just the start, and the China files must now be published in full and without delay.

"Until that time the stench of scandal will hang around this Government.”

After the files' partial release, Christopher Cash said he was "completely innocent" and has been “placed in an impossible position” because he has not been able to prove it in a public trial.

Mr Cash said on Wednesday night: “I wish to reiterate that I am completely innocent. Not just because the case against me was dropped, but because at no point did I ever intentionally assist Chinese intelligence.

“As I said to the police when I was arrested, such a suggestion is against everything I stand for. I have, for a long time, been concerned by the influence of the Chinese Communist Party in the United Kingdom and, prior to these false allegations, was working to inform parliamentarians and the public about those risks.

“I have been placed in an impossible position. I have not had the daylight of a public trial to show my innocence, and I should not have to take part in a trial by media.”

He added that the statements published on Wednesday evening were “completely devoid of the context that would have been given at trial”.

“Furthermore, the assessments of the information shared would have been subject to a root and branch challenge. Those assessments would not have withstood the scrutiny of a public trial,” he added.

“I cannot emphasise my position strongly enough. I have lost a career I loved for an allegation against me of which I am entirely innocent.”