Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has faced fierce criticism in the Commons after announcing that China lifted "all restrictions" on current British parliamentarians – but not on those who left Parliament, nor on lawyers and academics who were also sanctioned. Critics accused Beijing of using "divide and conquer" tactics to trick the Government.
Conservative former security minister Tom Tugendhat challenged Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle directly. He said China's selective lifting of sanctions was «a direct affront to the democracy of this place, an attempt to divide and conquer that we've seen China play against the European Parliament, and sadly has tricked our Government too.»
China imposed the sanctions in 2021 on several MPs including Tugendhat, former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Senior Deputy Speaker Nusrat Ghani and former minister Neil O'Brien. The measures banned them from entering China, Hong Kong and Macau, froze their property in China and prohibited Chinese citizens and institutions from doing business with them.
Starmer defends engagement approach
The Prime Minister acknowledged the criticism but defended his decision to engage. He told the Commons: «I did raise it directly, and that got the response that restrictions do not apply to parliamentarians. I accept the challenge, the point, that we need to go further. That doesn't mean that what we've achieved should be put to one side.»
Starmer insisted leader-level discussions were necessary. «In order to go further, we have to engage, and we have to engage at the leader level», he said.
Badenoch mocks "Labubu doll" diplomacy
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch launched a scathing attack on what she called Starmer's «supine and short-termist approach». She mocked his trip's modest achievements, saying he returned with «next to nothing» beyond a Labubu doll.
Badenoch emphasized that engaging with China was necessary – «even though the Chancellor (Rachel Reeves) wasn't allowed to go, even though they are an authoritarian state who seek to undermine our interests. Even though they spy on us, sometimes within the walls of this building, even though they fund regimes around the world hostile to our country.»
She criticized the sanctions lifting as meaningless. «The worst thing was the Prime Minister claiming a glorious triumph with the lifting of sanctions on four Conservative MPs, as if he'd done us a favour», Badenoch told the Commons. «Those MPs were sanctioned because they stood up to China. They stood up against human rights abuses. Those people don't want to go to China. The Chinese know that. They know that they are giving him something that costs absolutely nothing. Why can't the British Prime Minister see that?»
Cross-party criticism of weak position
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey agreed Starmer was right to engage but said he approached China «from a position of weakness». He drew parallels to Starmer's approach to President Trump, saying the Prime Minister promised Beijing «a super-embassy here in London in return for relatively meagre offers from China.»
Labour MP Liam Byrne, chairman of the Business and Trade Committee, welcomed the Prime Minister's «serious engagement» but called for clarity. He said: «The complexities of China require from Britain a whole of society approach, which is completely impossible until the Government publishes a clear China strategy to explain what is off limits and how we're going to rebalance competition with Chinese industry that is six times over-subsidised compared to our firms.»
Starmer hit back at Badenoch, accusing her of wanting «to stick her head in the sand, unable to influence anything in a volatile world» – calling such an approach «an abdication of responsibility».
Note: This article was created with Artificial Intelligence (AI).
