The UK is too scared to simply say no to China.
Deputy PM Angela Rayner has pushed back the deadline for deciding whether to allow a new Chinese “super-embassy” to be built in London — she’s now delaying her ruling from Sep 9 to Oct 21 saying more time was needed for scrutiny of the plans as Beijing had refused to provide full schematics for the project; some proposed rooms inside the new embassy were redacted in the blueprint.
Planning consultants hired on behalf of the 
state said it was not “necessary or appropriate to provide full internal layout plans”. They said these would not affect the external appearance or “material planning considerations”, and said a “simplified floorplate” should be enough.
The request for greater detail was rejected and Rayner’s team was told the level of information already provided should be sufficient and was in line with “established planning norms”.
A letter sent on behalf of Beijing also said that the US embassy in Nine Elms, south London, “did not disclose details of internal layouts”.
However, progress did appear to have been made over concerns about the embassy encroaching on a public site, which housed the Royal Mint until 1967 and was previously a Cistercian abbey.
The Home Office and Foreign Office had raised the issue of the embassy restricting access to a path to view the ruins of the 14th-century abbey.
In a joint letter, the two departments said “suitable mitigation” had been agreed and that officials had agreed not to treat the public viewing space or pathway as Beijing’s land.
There were also concerns about a territorial dispute. If police were required to attend an emergency in the public space, they would have had to seek the Chinese embassy’s permission to go on or through its land to reach the viewing platform for the ruins.
The pavilion housing the ruins will remain within the embassy’s diplomatic estate, the Home Office and Foreign Office said, but China had agreed to “put in place the necessary security checks before the public access these ruins”, with the “finer details” still “to be confirmed”.
China’s planning consultants said the country would not “claim diplomatic inviolability … with a view to providing UK personnel carrying out official duties including police and medical staff with access”.
The concession appeared to mark a climbdown by the UK government, which had previously sought a “hard perimeter” around the embassy.
The explanations are far from satisfactory.
“The government set very few conditions and the Chinese didn’t even meet those. Now, to visit the abbey ruins, dissidents who want to visit will be on Chinese land, vulnerable to capture, out of the reach of UK authorities.”
“Worse, the explanations for the redactions are far from satisfactory. The Chinese assurances amount to ‘trust me bro’, to which the UK has willingly caved. Extending the deadline shows clear partiality and will surely feature if a judicial review is launched.”
If approved, the 5.5-acre site in East Smithfield on the east side of the City of London would be the largest Chinese embassy in Europe.
The 20,000 sq m plot would be transformed into an enormous complex designed by Sir David Chipperfield, the prizewinning architect behind the Neues Museum in Berlin and the Turner Contemporary in Margate.
However, even if Rayner approves the embassy, it is likely to be the subject of a judicial review seeking to thwart the project on legal grounds.
thetimes.com/uk/politics/ar
Deputy PM Angela Rayner has pushed back the deadline for deciding whether to allow a new Chinese “super-embassy” to be built in London — she’s now delaying her ruling from Sep 9 to Oct 21 saying more time was needed for scrutiny of the plans as Beijing had refused to provide full schematics for the project; some proposed rooms inside the new embassy were redacted in the blueprint.
Planning consultants hired on behalf of the state said it was not “necessary or appropriate to provide full internal layout plans”. They said these would not affect the external appearance or “material planning considerations”, and said a “simplified floorplate” should be enough.
The request for greater detail was rejected and Rayner’s team was told the level of information already provided should be sufficient and was in line with “established planning norms”.
A letter sent on behalf of Beijing also said that the US embassy in Nine Elms, south London, “did not disclose details of internal layouts”.
However, progress did appear to have been made over concerns about the embassy encroaching on a public site, which housed the Royal Mint until 1967 and was previously a Cistercian abbey.
The Home Office and Foreign Office had raised the issue of the embassy restricting access to a path to view the ruins of the 14th-century abbey.
In a joint letter, the two departments said “suitable mitigation” had been agreed and that officials had agreed not to treat the public viewing space or pathway as Beijing’s land.
There were also concerns about a territorial dispute. If police were required to attend an emergency in the public space, they would have had to seek the Chinese embassy’s permission to go on or through its land to reach the viewing platform for the ruins.
The pavilion housing the ruins will remain within the embassy’s diplomatic estate, the Home Office and Foreign Office said, but China had agreed to “put in place the necessary security checks before the public access these ruins”, with the “finer details” still “to be confirmed”.
China’s planning consultants said the country would not “claim diplomatic inviolability … with a view to providing UK personnel carrying out official duties including police and medical staff with access”.
The concession appeared to mark a climbdown by the UK government, which had previously sought a “hard perimeter” around the embassy.
The explanations are far from satisfactory.
“The government set very few conditions and the Chinese didn’t even meet those. Now, to visit the abbey ruins, dissidents who want to visit will be on Chinese land, vulnerable to capture, out of the reach of UK authorities.”
“Worse, the explanations for the redactions are far from satisfactory. The Chinese assurances amount to ‘trust me bro’, to which the UK has willingly caved. Extending the deadline shows clear partiality and will surely feature if a judicial review is launched.”
If approved, the 5.5-acre site in East Smithfield on the east side of the City of London would be the largest Chinese embassy in Europe.
The 20,000 sq m plot would be transformed into an enormous complex designed by Sir David Chipperfield, the prizewinning architect behind the Neues Museum in Berlin and the Turner Contemporary in Margate.
However, even if Rayner approves the embassy, it is likely to be the subject of a judicial review seeking to thwart the project on legal grounds.
thetimes.com/uk/politics/ar
Quote
Byron Wan
@Byron_Wan
Deputy prime minister Angela Rayner has demanded additional information from China over its plans for a new “mega” embassy in London after several of the drawings contained areas that were blacked out.
A letter sent by Rayner’s housing department to the embassy said it