
Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision
Plans for a Chinese super-embassy in central London have become a 'walk of shame' for the Government, a former leader of the Conservative Party has said.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith said response by the Government to the proposed embassy near the the capital's financial district had become 'Project Kowtow', as he criticised the Government for 'one denial after another (and) one betrayal after another'.
Sir Iain referred to the warnings reportedly issued by the White House and Dutch government to Downing Street over the plans, which is set to be scrutinised by ministers. The worries stem from the close proximity of the proposed embassy's Royal Mint Court site to data centres and communication cables.
The Sunday Times said the US was 'deeply concerned' about the plans, quoting a senior US official.
In response, planning minister Matthew Pennycook said he could not give a full response as the matter was still to come before the department for a decision, and any verdict could be challenged by the courts.
Sir Iain said: 'Beijing has a recent history of cutting cables and confirmed infrastructure hacks, including embedding malware capable of disabling all that infrastructure.
'Minister Peter Kyle yesterday on television said surprisingly that this was in the planning process and could be managed. Will the minister correct this record? The planning inquiry has concluded, no changes can be made to the Chinese planning application at all.
'I'll remind him the application contains nothing about cabling. Indeed to the inquiry, the Chinese have rejected only two requests, which he referred to actually, made by the Government in the letter from the foreign and home secretaries, despite ministers regularly saying that this letter, and I quote, should give those concerned, 'comfort'.'
The Conservative MP said rerouting the cables would cost millions of pounds, and asked Mr Pennycook why the Government had denied the existence of cables until the White House confirmed it.
He asked Mr Pennycook to deny reports by Chinese state media, saying the UK had given the Chinese assurances that it would allow a development 'no matter what'.
He added: 'I see this as Project Kowtow, one denial after another, one betrayal after another. No wonder our allies believe that this Chinese mega embassy is now becoming a walk of shame for the Government.'
Mr Pennycook replied because of the 'quasi-judicial nature' of his role, he could not comment on details of the application. He also said it would not be 'appropriate' for him to comment on the cabling or national security issues.
He said he did not 'recognise the characterisation' by the Sunday Times of the embassy being raised in talks between the UK and China on trade.
'It is important to also emphasise that only material planning considerations can be taken into account in determining this case,' he said. 'But, as I say, I cannot comment in any detail on a case and it is not yet before the department.'
Tory shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Parliament had been treated with disdain by the Government.
Mr Hollinrake said: 'Question after question, letter after letter, the Government has consistently treated Parliament with complete disregard on this matter. Stonewalling legitimate inquiries about national security, about ministerial discussions, and warnings about security bodies.'
He added: 'Why won't the Government follow the examples of the US, Australian, and Irish governments which veto similar embassies that threaten their national security?
'The Government is on the verge of making a decision that will lead to huge risk, that will persist for decades. Will they change course before it is too late?'
Mr Pennycook replied: 'No decision has been made on this case. No application is yet before the department.'
Marie Rimmer, Labour MP for St Helens South and Whiston, said: 'China has a track record of aggressive state-backed espionage, and surely this country cannot afford to make a massive underestimation of what risk if this would go ahead?'
She added: 'We cannot not say anything in this House. We must comment on what we see, and please understand that we must do so.'
Meanwhile, former security minister, Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, asked whether the Government believed the Chinese would treat a similar application in the same way.
He said: 'Do you honestly believe that thr minister thinks that the Chinese would look at this proposal in the same way?
'Do we actually in this House believe that our economic security being threatened, as highlighted by the Americans and the Dutch, would go through a bureaucratic planning process with no ability to vary it because, frankly, them's the orders?
'I don't think that's the way China would do it, and it's certainly not the way we should.'
Mr Pennycook replied: 'I'm very glad that we have a different and more robust planning system than the People's Republic of China.'
Later in the session, Conservative MP Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) asked if the officer considering the case is 'cleared to receive top secret information'.
Mr Pennycook replied: 'A planning inspector is assessing the case as part of a public inquiry.
'And I'm afraid, while I recognise why (Mr Jopp) has asked the question, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on national security matters.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Western Telegraph
an hour ago
- Western Telegraph
Starmer and Reynolds meet US commerce secretary in push to implement trade deal
The Prime Minister dropped in on a meeting between Howard Lutnick and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds in Downing Street on Tuesday. Mr Lutnick was in London for talks with China on resolving the trade war between Washington and Beijing, and Mr Reynolds took the opportunity to meet him in person to push for the UK-US trade deal announced last month to be implemented as soon as possible. The meeting follows talks between the Business Secretary and US trade representative Jamieson Greer in Paris last week. Under the terms of the agreement announced by Sir Keir and Donald Trump, the US will implement import quotas that will effectively eliminate tariffs on British steel and cut the levy on vehicles to 10%. But the deal has yet to be implemented and tariffs on both steel and cars remain at 25%, although the UK has been spared the increase on steel duties to 50% that Mr Trump imposed on the rest of the world last week. In a post on social media, Mr Reynolds said he had discussed 'progress on our trade deal – including UK autos and steel' with Mr Lutnick. UK officials remain hopeful that the deal will be implemented soon, but Tuesday's meeting does not appear to have moved the issue beyond both sides agreeing the need to move quickly. Speaking in the Commons last week, Sir Keir said he was 'very confident' that tariffs would come down in line with the deal 'within a very short time'. Implementing the deal will require the UK to pass legislation, likely to involve regulations rather than a full Act of Parliament, while the US will also need to create a legal mechanism to bring steel and vehicle quotas into effect.


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
UK lawyer loses bid to overturn misconduct findings over $3 bln windfall
LONDON, June 10 (Reuters) - A British lawyer who stood to receive up to $3 billion from Nigeria over a collapsed gas project on Tuesday lost a bid to overturn court findings that he acted corruptly out of greed. Seamus Andrew had represented Process & Industrial Developments (P&ID), a little-known British Virgin Islands-based company, in a long-running legal battle with Nigeria that ended in a court victory for Africa's most populous country. Nigeria had been facing a bill for $11 billion, representing around a third of its foreign exchange reserves, after P&ID won an arbitration case over the collapse of a 2010 gas supply deal. But London's High Court in 2023 overturned the damages bill after finding that P&ID had paid bribes in connection with the underlying contract and the resulting arbitration. P&ID had denied paying bribes and accused Nigeria of institutional incompetence. Its application to appeal against the High Court's decision was refused. The court had also found that P&ID's lawyers, including Andrew, received confidential Nigerian documents during the arbitration, which they knew they were not entitled to see, with a judge describing Andrew's conduct as "indefensible." Andrew could have received 20% of all proceeds recovered from Nigeria, up to $3 billion of the $11 billion award, after becoming a director of P&ID and acquiring a stake in the company in 2017 following the end of the arbitration. Andrew applied to the Court of Appeal to overturn the findings against him, arguing that inadequate reasons were given for the criticism and that he was not given proper notice that findings would be made against him. But his application for permission to appeal was refused, with Judge Julian Flaux ruling on Tuesday that Andrew had brought his application too late and that, in any event, the criticism was adequately reasoned, foreseeable and justified. "Overall, the finding that Mr Andrew's conduct was indefensible was plainly correct," Flaux added. Andrew said in a statement: "Although I am disappointed by the outcome of my appeal, I believe that I acted in accordance with my professional duties and I am confident that my position will be vindicated in due course."


Times
an hour ago
- Times
Rough sleeping to be decriminalised
Rough sleeping is to be decriminalised after the government pledged to get rid of a 200-year-old law against vagrancy. Labour said the Vagrancy Act, which became law in 1824 and criminalises 'idle and disorderly persons, and rogues and vagabonds, in England', will be repealed by next spring. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, who is also housing secretary, said Labour was 'drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society'. She said: 'No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and by scrapping this cruel and outdated law, we are making sure that can never happen again.' Rushanara Ali, the homelessness minister, said the 'archaic' law was 'neither just nor fit for purpose'. She added: 'Scrapping the Vagrancy Act for good is another step forward in our mission to tackle homelessness in all its forms, by focusing our efforts on its root causes.' The government said new 'targeted measures will ensure police have the powers they need to keep communities safe — filling the gap left over by removing previous powers'. These will be brought in through amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill. There will be new offences of facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with the intention of committing a crime. Ministers said that means organised begging by criminal gangs will remain a crime. It will be illegal for anyone to organise others to beg. Homelessness charities hailed the law change. Matt Downie, the Crisis chief executive, said: 'This is a landmark moment that will change lives and prevent thousands of people from being pushed into the shadows, away from safety.' He praised the government for showing 'principled leadership in scrapping this pernicious act'. He said: 'We hope this signals a completely different approach to helping people forced on to the streets and clears the way for a positive agenda that is about supporting people who desperately want to move on in life and fulfil their potential. We look forward to assisting the UK government with their forthcoming homelessness strategy to do exactly that.' Emma Haddad, chief executive of St Mungo's, said the act's repeal 'cannot come soon enough' and called for a 'focus on tackling the health, housing and wider societal issues that are causing homelessness in the first place'. Centrepoint, the youth homelessness charity, warned that a challenge would be 'ensuring that proposed amendments don't have the unintended consequences of punishing people instead of supporting them'.