Feel like I’ve been on the phone to half of Fleet St this week. To save time, here are some unanswered questions re: #SpyScandal which would repay investigation:
1. Which minister decided not to provide evidence to the CPS - the decision which collapsed the case? CPS was asking for months. Inconceivable that ministers were unaware.
2. Who provided the incorrect legal advice that a formal threat designation would be required for evidence to be provided to the CPS? Or was this just made up?
3. What discussions took place with Beijing officials before the case was dropped? We know the Chinese Ambassador was demarched. Was this a negotiated slap-on-the-wrist let off?
4. What was the view of the Treasury about the case? What representations did they make, and to whom?
5. What power has Powell had over govt China policy? I’m being told he was an unofficial China Tsar, bossing the FCDO approach.
6. How has the mega-embassy plan featured in any negotiations? It would be unlawful for govt to have given any assurances to Beijing about their planning application, so the embassy decision should not have featured at any point.
7. What other key decisions regarding China policy did Powell make? Shutting down the China Audit, we know. But what about restarting the Economic and Financial Dialogue (paused when Beijing ripped up its treaty with the UK over Hong Kong)? What about trying to restart extradition with Hong Kong? What about failing to help Jimmy Lai? What about trying to readmit the Chinese Ambassador to Parliament? What about failing to place tariffs on China for Electric Vehicles (the only major allied democracy which hasn’t).
8. What assurances can the govt give that the ongoing National Security Act case relating to transnational repression of Hong Kong activists and others won’t be similarly jettisoned to avoid upsetting Beijing?
9. Given that Powell is a SPAD, which minister bears responsibility for his actions? This one, we know.
GIF
read image description