Badenoch says the CPS said it was satisfied with the decision to charge the case "on the basis on where the law stood at that time".

"What changed and what collapsed the case," Badenoch asks.

Starmer repeats that the government will publish the witness statements it provided to the case.

Badenoch now asks: "What on earth is the point of having a lawyer rather than a leader as a prime minister if he can't even get the law right on a matter of national security?"

She references a Sunday Times report which suggests that the PM's national security adviser, Jonathan Powell attended a "secret" meeting discussing the national security consequences of the China spy trial.

Did the meeting happen, Badenoch asks.

Starmer says there was a meeting in September but it did not involve Powell discussing evidence in any way.

He adds that the final statement in the case was made in August 2025 - prior to any meeting in September.

Back to Badenoch, who says the government should finish quoting her on how she thought China should be described.

She accuses the PM of "whataboutery".

Can it be true that only one man had anything to do with this failure, she asks.

Yes, Starmer swiftly quips back - repeating the position on China was set by the last government.

Starmer says: "The deputy national security adviser Matt Collins, set out the then-government's position in a substantive witness statement in 2023 which was subsequently supplemented by two further short statements.

"The Cabinet Secretary assures me that the DNSA faithfully set out the policy of the then-Tory government.

"I know first hand that the DNSA is a civil servant of the utmost integrity.

"Those opposite who worked with him, I am sure, would agree with that assessment.

"Under this Government, no minister or special adviser played any role in the provision of evidence."

The "substantive evidence was provided in 2023 by the previous [Tory] government," Starmer replies.

He quotes a speech from the then-foreign secretary, titled "our position on China," in which he said describing China as a threat would be "impossible, impractical and most importantly unwise".

He also cites Badenoch - then business secretary - as having said: "We should certainly not be describing China as a foe."

"It's worth looking up the word 'foe' in the dictionary," he adds, saying that Badenoch said she had "shied away" from calling China as a threat.

Kemi Badenoch gets to her feet for her first question. She calls the collapse of the China spy case "simply unbelievable".

She references previous occasions where China had been referred to as a threat.

How is it possible the government failed to provide the evidence the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) needed, she asks.

Joshua Nevett
Reporting from the House of Commons

There was an angry intervention from the Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle midway through the PM’s statement on the China spying case.

After hearing some murmuring from the Tory benches, Hoyle stood up and said he wanted the PM to have the opportunity to explain the government’s position on the China spy case.

Starmer says that after taking legal advice he has decided to publish the government's witness statements in the collapsed China spy case.

"I want to make clear, I intend to publish the witness statements in full," he adds.

Opening PMQs, Starmer makes a statement on the the collapsed case of two men accused of spying for China.

He reiterates the government is "disappointed" by the outcome - and adds that it wanted to see prosecutions.

National security is the first priority of this government, he adds.

He further criticises the "baseless accusations" in recent weeks "from the party opposite", adding the relevant period of the accusations covers when the Conservatives were in government.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has taken his place at the dispatch box, which means PMQs is about to begin.

We'll be bringing you the key lines from their exchange, alongside analysis from our team in the Commons.

Follow along by tapping watch live at the top of this page.

Tories keen to keep up pressure on China spy rowpublished at 12:00 BST 15 October

12:00 BST 15 October

Helen Catt
Political correspondent

The Conservatives have been keen to keep up the pressure on the government over the collapse of the case against two men accused of spying for China.

PMQs seems a likely place for them to continue that.

The format can be used very effectively by opposition leaders as it gives them an opportunity to ask for precise details - and to follow up if they don’t get them.

Kemi Badenoch did well last month quizzing the Prime Minister about the former ambassador Peter Mandelson and she may be hoping to repeat that.

There is danger though. The government’s response throughout this has to been to claim it was the Conservative’s position on China and the state of legislation which they did not change that is to blame.

Joshua Nevett
Reporting from the House of Commons

Image source, PA Media

The Conservative leader has been peppering the prime minister with questions about the collapse of the China spying case in recent days. And she's expected to do so today, when she faces Keir Starmer at the dispatch box.

At her last PMQs outing in September, Badenoch used her questions to good effect, focusing solely on the pressure the PM was under over his now-sacked ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson.

She may well use the same tactic today, in order to repeatedly prod a prime minister over what's become a politically awkward row between the government and prosecutors.

On Sunday, Badenoch wrote to the prime minister asking him to address a series of "unanswered" questions about the collapsed China spying case. In her letter, Badenoch accused Starmer and his ministers of being "too weak to stand up to Beijing on a crucial matter of national security".

In particular, she honed in on the role of Jonathan Powell, the PM's national security adviser, and his involvement in the case.

The Conservatives have suggested Powell failed to give prosecutors the evidence they said they needed to secure convictions - something the government denies. Ministers have also insisted Powell had no involvement in the substance or evidence of the case.

The Conservatives have strongly criticised the government over the collapse of the China spy case - although ministers insist the decision was made by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with no minister, member of the government or special adviser involved.

The Tories have now asked the CPS whether it would be a possibility to restart prosecutions against the two men accused if new evidence is brought forward by the government which addresses the point of China being declared a threat to national security.

However, there is an exceptionally high bar to prosecuting someone for a second time after an acquittal in court - and it is not possible to do so for people charged under the Official Secrets Act.

To prosecute someone for a second time, there must be new and compelling evidence that could not have been available in the original case - and such a case can only be brought with the permission of the Court of Appeal.

But that rule is irrelevant to the two men, as it only applies to the most serious of offences, such as murder and rape.

Cash and Berry were charged under the Official Secrets Act, which is not one of the alleged crimes that can ever be prosecuted for a second time.

That protection against what is known as "double jeopardy" is a basic legal principle that has existed for 800 years.

Image source, Reuters

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has just been spotted leaving No 10 to head to the Commons for PMQs.

It kicks off at midday, as always. We'll bring you updates and analysis on the key lines here - watch live above from 12:00 BST to follow along,

Image source, PA Media

As we've been reporting, the now-collapsed case against two people accused of spying for China could feature heavily in today's PMQs.

Last month, the Speaker of the Commons said the decision to drop the charges could leave Parliament vulnerable to espionage.

Sir Lindsay Hoyle told the Times that he took the security of the house "incredibly seriously" and was considering launching a private action against Christopher Berry and Christopher Cash.

The pair were charged under the Official Secrets Act after they were accused of gathering and providing information prejudicial to the safety and interests of the UK between 28 December 2021 and 3 February 2023.

They consistently denied the charges, while Beijing has called the allegations "malicious slander".

The director of public prosecutions has since said the case collapsed because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat.

Hoyle told the Commons that he was "very unhappy" about the decision.

He told the Times, external: "I believe this leaves the door open to foreign actors trying to spy on the House. This door must be closed hard."

Helen Catt
Political correspondent

It's a row that is rumbling on and on for the government (not least, of course, because the opposition sense it is worth stoking).

The government does seem to have painted itself into a corner over the release of witness statements.

Suggesting that the Crown Prosecution Service was stopping their release, only for the CPS to say they weren't, makes it very awkward to do anything other than publish them.

There is a question though over whether the statements will really change anything.

Unless they show something radically different to the situation that has so far been discussed, the central allegation here hasn’t been that the government toned down evidence, but that it perhaps could have provided more and chose not to.

It maintains that's not the case and the publication of the statements may not shed any more light on that.

Barring any surprises, it is unlikely to draw a line under this story - for the government or for those asking the questions.

Image source, Reuters

As we've been reporting, the government is facing questions after a case against two men accused of spying for China collapsed, just weeks before the trial was due to go ahead.

What was the case about?

Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry had been charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024. They had been accused of gathering and providing information prejudicial to the safety and interests of the state between December 2021 and February 2023.

Both pleaded not guilty in October 2024 and have consistently maintained their innocence since.

Why did it collapse?

The head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the case collapsed because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Parkinson, said that while there was sufficient evidence when charges were originally brought against the two men in April 2024, a precedent set by another spying case earlier this year meant China would need to have been labelled a "threat to national security" at the time of the alleged offences.

He said the CPS had tried to obtain further evidence from the government "over many months" but witness statements did not meet the threshold to prosecute.

Some legal experts have questioned whether the CPS would have needed this evidence to go ahead with the prosecution.

We've got further details in our explainer.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has told Sky News she is looking at both tax rises and spending cuts in the budget.

"Of course, we're looking at tax and spending as well," she said, when asked how she would deal with the country's economic challenges in her 26 November Budget.

Reeves hinted at tax rises at the Labour party conference last month, saying the government's choices over taxes had been made "harder" by international events and the "long-term damage" done to the economy.

She is facing a difficult Budget, with economists warning tax rises or spending cuts will be needed for the chancellor to meet her self-imposed borrowing rules.

Image source, EPA/Shutterstock

New projections from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) suggest that the UK is set to be the second-fastest-growing of the world's most advanced economies this year.

But the IMF also predicts the UK will face the highest rate of inflation among G7 nations both this year and next, driven by rising energy and utility bills.

It also warned the UK still faces stronger inflation than in other similar countries, with prices forecast to rise by 3.4% this year and 2.5% in 2026.

The Fund also said there had been a "muted response" to the wave of tariffs imposed on imports to the US this year, but that they were having an impact on global growth.

At Labour’s annual party conference in Liverpool last month, Reeves said the government is facing difficult choices, as she promised to not take risks with the public finances.

In her speech, Reeves said she will keep "taxes, inflation and interest rates as low as possible".

But hinting at further tax rises in November's Budget, she said the government’s choices had been made "harder" by international events and the "long-term damage" done to the economy.

Reeves is also facing pressure from some Labour MPs to increase spending, with many calling for the government to scrap the two-child benefit cap.

Image source, PA Media

More now on the collapsed case against two men accused of spying for China.

There is every possibility Starmer will face sustained scrutiny on the case when he appears in the House of Commons.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch on Sunday wrote to the PM asking him to address "unanswered" questions about the collapsed case.

In her letter, Badenoch accused Starmer, or his ministers, of being "too weak to stand up to Beijing on a crucial matter of national security", claiming the government had sought to "appease China".

Prosecutors unexpectedly dropped the case against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry last month, prompting criticism from ministers and MPs. Both men deny the allegations.

The director of public prosecutions said the case collapsed because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat.