On Tuesday Prime Minister Starmer, in a bid to justify his intervention in, and abortion of the trial of two men suspected of spying for China, said the Government could not state that China had been a national security threat when Chris Cash and Christopher Berry were arrested in 2023, on allegations they had gathered intelligence for China while researching in Parliament going back to 2021.
The Prime Minster told reporters: ‘Now that’s not a political to and fro, that’s a matter of law. You have to prosecute people on the basis of the circumstances at the time of the alleged offence . . . So all the focus needs to be on the policy of the Tory government in place then.’
Starmer said the Government could draw on only the previous government’s assessment, which dubbed China an ‘epoch-defining challenge’.
This is a blatant lie.
In fact the previous administration did describe China as a ‘threat’ and so did Starmer’s administration.
In 2022, Liz Truss declared China a ‘threat‘. Rishi Sunak repeated the coding in 2023.
In June this year, the then Foreign Secretary David Lammy told the Commons that following an audit soon after election in July 2024, China is a ‘sophisticated and persistent threat’ given its ‘espionage, interference in our democracy, and the undermining of our economic security’.
Subsequently, towards the end of August, the Starmer administration’s review of national security concluded with a downgrade of China from ‘threat’ to ‘geostrategic challenge’.
This is merely the latest case of the Starmer administration trading British security for Chinese favours, while denying the influence of China or the threat from China.
Within months of being elected the Labour clownshow tried to convince the public that Britain had an obligation under international law' to give Mauritius sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, and to lease the British military base on the island of Diego Garcia for 99 years at a cost of almost £35billion. This cost was admitted in August, after a Freedom of Information request, though in May Starmer had told Parliament that the deal would cost £3.4billion over 99 years.
A Prime Minister does not have the power to make such a decision without it being put to Parliament, and it is debatable whether even parliament could have made such a decision without going through a long and complex legal process, therefore it is likely treason has been committed.
No comments:
Post a Comment