In the swirling aftermath of a collapsed espionage trial that had gripped the United Kingdom’s political and security circles, cabinet minister Bridget Phillipson offered the government’s most definitive assurance yet: Jonathan Powell, national security adviser to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, played no role in the decision to drop the high-profile case against two Britons accused of spying for China. The statement, delivered on October 12, 2025, came as questions mounted over the government’s handling of the trial and the broader implications for Britain’s approach to China.
The trial in question involved Christopher Cash, a 30-year-old parliamentary researcher, and Christopher Berry, a 33-year-old teacher. Both men were charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024, accused of passing sensitive information to a Chinese intelligence agent between December 2021 and February 2023. They denied all allegations, and, following the collapse of the case last month, were formally declared not guilty. The case’s sudden end has left many in Westminster and beyond searching for answers—and, in some quarters, pointing fingers.
According to Sky News, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the case just weeks before trial, citing an inability to obtain critical evidence that China was officially designated a national security threat during the period of the alleged offenses. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Parkinson, took the unusual step of writing to Members of Parliament, explaining that the CPS had tried "over many months" to secure necessary evidence from the government but was repeatedly rebuffed. Without such evidence, Parkinson said, the prosecution could not meet the legal standard required under the Official Secrets Act, which demands that the information passed must be useful to an "enemy."
Bridget Phillipson, appearing on both Sky News and the BBC, was pressed on whether Jonathan Powell had influenced the outcome. She responded unequivocally: "Yes, I can give that assurance. He did not have those conversations around the substance or the evidence of the case." She added, "We're very disappointed that the CPS were not able to take forward the prosecution." According to The Telegraph, Phillipson further clarified that Powell was not involved in discussions about the substance or evidence, emphasizing that the CPS was best placed to explain why it could not proceed.
Yet, not everyone in Westminster is satisfied with these assurances. Former Conservative home secretary Priti Patel called Phillipson’s statement "a very bold statement," telling Sky News that "the national security adviser, as we know, is a political adviser." Patel referenced media disclosures about Powell’s involvement in meetings with senior civil servants, suggesting these gatherings aimed to "rewrite the narrative around China, saying that they're not a threat, they're a challenge." She accused the Labour government of "political interference in the judicial process," arguing that the previous Conservative government had recognized China as an adversary and passed legislation to restrict Chinese acquisitions in the UK.
The controversy intensified after the Sunday Times reported that the case was dropped following a meeting in September 2025, attended by government officials including Powell. The report suggested the government’s evidence was based on the national security strategy published in June 2025, which notably does not refer to Beijing as an "enemy." This omission, critics argue, undermined the prosecution’s case and led directly to its collapse.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp went further, telling the BBC: "It looks as if Jonathan Powell was behind this decision – and he should resign if he is." He called for ministers to explain why they did not disclose what he described as "reams of information" demonstrating China’s threat to national security during 2021-2023. Several former Conservative ministers and advisers claimed there was ample evidence—including a suspected Chinese hack on the Ministry of Defence and public warnings from MI5’s Ken McCallum about a "sustained campaign" of Chinese espionage—that could have supported the prosecution.
Prime Minister Starmer, speaking to reporters in India, maintained that the government could only draw on the policy of the previous Conservative administration, which had designated China an "epoch-defining challenge" rather than an outright enemy. "You have to prosecute people on the basis of the circumstances at the time of the alleged offence," he said, deflecting responsibility back onto his predecessors.
Adding another layer of intrigue, The Daily Mail and other outlets highlighted Powell’s connections to the 48 Group, a prominent pro-China lobbying organization in Britain. Powell is listed as a ‘fellow’ of the group, which has been accused of cultivating British elites to further Beijing’s interests. Other notable figures associated with the 48 Group include Peter Mandelson, Tony Blair, George Osborne, and Powell’s own brother, Lord Powell of Bayswater. The group, while officially promoting trade relations, has faced allegations of acting as a conduit for Chinese influence—a charge it denies.
Powell’s background is indeed storied. He served as Tony Blair’s chief of staff from 1997 to 2007, later joining Morgan Stanley and founding the conflict resolution think tank Inter Mediate. In this capacity, he made several trips to China, holding meetings with the Grandview Institution—an organization some former diplomats allege is a front for China’s Ministry of State Security. Clive Hamilton, author of Hidden Hand, a respected book on Chinese influence, argued, "Powell seems to have close links with an organisation in China that is stacked with high-level intelligence officers. Grandview is a nest of spies. For the PM’s national security adviser it’s beyond belief." However, a Cabinet Office source insisted Powell is not, and has never been, a member of the 48 Group, despite his name appearing on its website.
The Liberal Democrats, for their part, have called the government’s approach to China a risk to national security. Calum Miller, the party’s foreign affairs spokesman, urged ministers to block a new Chinese embassy in London, warning that it could enable "Chinese espionage on an industrial scale."
As the dust settles, the saga leaves the government facing urgent questions—not just about the specifics of the collapsed trial, but about its broader strategy toward an assertive and increasingly influential China. The opposition, meanwhile, is unlikely to let the matter rest, with Parliament set to debate the issue and calls for further transparency growing louder.
For now, Jonathan Powell remains in his post, with the Prime Minister’s full confidence. But as the debate over Britain’s China policy heats up, the scrutiny of those at its heart is unlikely to fade anytime soon.
