PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Official Secrets Act: Alleged Breach - 17 November 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
Contributions from Alison Griffiths, are highlighted with a yellow border.
Alison Griffiths
Bognor Regis and Littlehampton
15:10:12
Dan Jarvis
The Minister for Security
As set out on multiple occasions in this House, no Ministers and no special advisers played any role in the provision of evidence. The Director of Public Prosecutions has confirmed that publicly.
15:10:55
Alison Griffiths
Our judicial system is rightly rigorous and independent, which is why the Government’s handling of intelligence that is central to national security, and passing it to prosecutors, matters so much. As the Minister responsible for our state threats framework and domestic security, will the Home Secretary tell the House when she was first alerted to concerns that crucial evidence had not been passed to the Crown Prosecution Service? Does she agree that the public deserve a full and frank account of how two alleged Chinese spies were able to walk free?
Dan Jarvis
This was an independent decision by the CPS, and we have repeatedly made clear that there was no political interference in the evidence provided. This Government are extremely disappointed with the outcome of this case, and remain concerned about the espionage threat posed to the UK. We are working relentlessly to counter it.
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.