In a dramatic exchange during Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) on October 15, 2025, Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch sharply criticized Prime Minister Keir Starmer over the collapse of a high-profile China espionage case. The case, involving two British men accused of passing secrets to China, was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) due to insufficient evidence that China posed a national security threat at the time of the alleged offenses. (Reuters)
Badenoch’s Accusations
Badenoch used all six of her questions during PMQs to challenge Starmer, accusing his government of mishandling the case and lacking transparency. She described the collapse of the trial as “simply unbelievable” and questioned the Prime Minister’s competence, stating, “What on earth is the point of us having a lawyer rather than a leader as prime minister if he can’t even get the law right on a matter of national security?” (The Independent)
Starmer’s Defense
In his opening statement, Starmer expressed deep disappointment over the case’s outcome and pledged to publish three key witness statements from Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Collins, which were central to the CPS’s decision to drop the charges. He attributed the failure to prosecute to the previous Conservative government’s failure to classify China as a national security threat, referencing national security reviews from 2021 and 2023. (The Times)
Starmer denied any political interference in the decision, emphasizing the importance of prosecutorial independence. He also noted that he had only read the witness statements the morning of October 15, 2025. (The Guardian)
Political Fallout
The clash between Badenoch and Starmer intensified the political debate over national security and the UK’s stance towards China. Conservative MPs demanded clarity and additional documents regarding any political involvement, particularly communications with the CPS. The Liberal Democrats reiterated calls for an independent inquiry and the publication of all legal advice related to the case. (The Guardian)
This confrontation underscores the ongoing tensions between the Conservative opposition and the Labour government over national security issues and the handling of sensitive intelligence matters.
During Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) on October 15, 2025, Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch launched a vigorous attack on Prime Minister Keir Starmer over the collapse of a high-profile China espionage case. The case involved two British men, Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry, who were accused of passing sensitive information to a Chinese agent. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the charges, citing insufficient evidence that China posed a national security threat at the time of the alleged offenses. (Reuters)
Starmer’s Defense
In his response, Starmer expressed deep disappointment over the case’s outcome and pledged to publish three key witness statements from Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Collins, which were central to the CPS’s decision to drop the charges. He attributed the failure to prosecute to the previous Conservative government’s failure to classify China as a national security threat, referencing national security reviews from 2021 and 2023. (The Times)
Starmer denied any political interference in the decision, emphasizing the importance of prosecutorial independence. He also noted that he had only read the witness statements the morning of October 15, 2025. (The Guardian)
Political Fallout
The clash between Badenoch and Starmer intensified the political debate over national security and the UK’s stance towards China. Conservative MPs demanded clarity and additional documents regarding any political involvement, particularly communications with the CPS. The Liberal Democrats reiterated calls for an independent inquiry and the publication of all legal advice related to the case. (The Guardian)
This confrontation underscores the ongoing tensions between the Conservative opposition and the Labour government over national security issues and the handling of sensitive intelligence matters.