‘Systemic failures’ not conspiracy caused collapse of China spy case

The government and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have been condemned for “systematic failures” that led to the collapse of the China spy trial.

An extraordinary row erupted after the case fell apart in September, with prosecutors and government officials seeking to blame each other after two men accused of spying for Beijing walked free, prompting accusations of a “cover-up”.

Ministers and civil servants have now each received a portion of the blame in a damning report by the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy (JCNSS), but were cleared of being involved in a conspiracy to appease China.

However, the committee cautioned against dismissing the case as a “one-off” caused by outdated espionage laws, warning that parallels in new legislation must be handled carefully to prevent a similar issue happening again.

The report comes just 24 hours after Sir Keir Starmer branded China a national security threat in a Mansion House speech on foreign policy, but insisted that his government still needs to work with Beijing.

The charges were dropped against former parliamentary researcher Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry when the CPS said it could not get evidence from the government referring to China as a national security threat. Both men deny passing secrets to Beijing between 2021 and 2023.

The JCNSS, which launched a highly unusual investigation into the collapsed case following the controversy, said in its report on Wednesday: “We appreciate that the sequence of some events has raised eyebrows.

“We did not find evidence of a coordinated high-level effort to bring about the collapse of the prosecution.

“Nor did we find evidence of deliberate efforts to obstruct the prosecution, circumvent constitutional safeguards or frustrate our inquiry.”

The cross-party group of MPs and peers added: “Overall, it is clear that there were serious systemic failures and deficiencies in communications, coordination and decision-making.

“The Crown Prosecution Service could have surfaced or escalated issues over misaligned expectations much earlier. The government team likewise did not have sufficiently clear processes for escalating issues where there was a lack of clarity.”

Attention had focused on a statement by deputy national security adviser (DNSA) Matt Collins, with prosecutors saying his refusal to describe Beijing as a “threat” to national security meant the case could not continue.

Mr Collins told the JCNSS he had provided evidence of a “range of threats” posed by China, but had not described the country as a “generic” threat because that was not the position of the Tory government.

The committee acknowledged the CPS’s assertion that it would have undermined the case at trial if Mr Collins, the central expert prosecution witness, refused to describe China as an active threat.

However, it said that taking all his statements together, “in our view it is plain that … these amounted to a more general active threat to the United Kingdom’s national security”.

“We regret that common sense interpretations of the wording provided in the DNSA’s witness statements were apparently not a sufficiently strong basis for meeting the evidential requirements the Crown Prosecution Service considered necessary under the Official Secrets Act 1911,” it said.

The committee said it would not seek to “unpick” the judgments of the government or the CPS, but questioned whether lawyers and officials working on Mr Collins’s witness statements could not have found “an alternative formulation” that was still in line with policy.

It also questioned whether prosecutors had been right to conclude that the legal tests “remained unmet”.

Questions were previously raised over the potential for undue influence on the case after national security adviser Jonathan Powell held a meeting with officials about the case, and about diplomatic relations with Beijing, just two days before the CPS moved to drop charges.

But after taking evidence, the JCNSS said it “did not find evidence of improper influence or deliberate efforts to obstruct the prosecution”.

The government said there was no discussion of evidence at the talks, which were attended by lawyers and covered a “range of scenarios” to “ensure that we managed our diplomatic relations”.

Communications between the government and the CPS were “inadequate”, and there was a “pervasive lack of clarity” about the nature of requests and evidential requirements, the report said.

During the JCNSS’s inquiry, the attorney general, Richard Hermer, sought to blame the collapse of the case on “out-of-date” UK espionage laws, which he said were “not fit for purpose”.

Lord Hermer said the use of the term “enemy” in the Official Secrets Act 1911 threw up difficulties. The term has since been replaced in the National Security Act 2023 with prosecutors instead having to prove that information had been “passed to a foreign power”.

The JCNSS accepted that the “root cause” of the problems with the collapsed case lay in the difficulties with the older law, under which the charges had been brought.

But it rejected any suggestion that the new legislation had solved the problem, pointing out that there may be “diplomatic sensitivities” around labelling people members of a foreign intelligence service.

A CPS spokesperson said: “We recognise the strong interest in this case. We will review the recommendations carefully and work with partners to identify where improvements can be made.

“Our decisions are made independently and based on law and evidence, and that principle remains at the heart of our work.”

A government spokesperson said:“We welcome the committee’s report that makes clear that allegations about interference in this case were baseless and untrue.

“The decision to drop the case was taken independently by the Crown Prosecution Service. We remain disappointed that this case did not reach trial.

“Protecting national security is our first duty and we will never waver from our efforts to keep the British people safe.”

David Dimbleby’s excellent monarchy series has one glaring omission

David Dimbleby is wandering around Windsor, filming some bit of royal ceremonial for his excellent BBC One miniseries What’s the Monarchy For?, when a man recognises him, turns to his wife, and says: “This guy is a famous liberal lefty.” Anyone who’s ever made the slightest acquaintance of him will know that this is abject nonsense, but not something that Dimbleby himself is much bothered by. He takes it in good heart – he’s a big chap in all respects – and reassures his interlocutor that he will of course be unbiased in his assessment of the state and the future of the British royal family. Which he is, though one is never quite sure who Dimbleby is addressing off-screen. Is it his producer? One of his kids? A vase? It would have worked better with conventional pieces to camera.

At any rate, Dimbleby’s own view, for what it’s worth after many decades covering some now dimly forgotten royal and state events, is that he is neither an instinctive, sentimental, ardent royalist (as his father Richard, who commentated on the late Queen’s coronation in 1953 famously was); but nor is he any kind of “lefty” iconoclastic republican. We see archive footage of him in 1973, for example, up in the gallery at Westminster Abbey, narrating Princess Anne’s ill-fated marriage to Mark Phillips. He takes a pragmatic view – in favour of monarchy insofar as it’s useful and carries the support of the people. From the sounds of the former courtiers, politicians, historians and journalists he speaks to in his investigation, and fortunately enough for the House of Windsor itself, this seems to be the approach taken by the royals too.

Himself something of a venerable national asset – he’s a lively 87 and should have celebrated his personal diamond jubilee in broadcasting last year – it’s refreshing to see him still going, still reporting, still doing vox pops rather as he did for the BBC’s 1964 general election coverage, and still exercising that curious instinct that made him such an effective interviewer. He pushes former chancellor, George Osborne, for example, on why the income that the Windsors receive from the Crown Estate (on top of the money coming in from the huge duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall) enjoys a ratchet – it can go up, but never down. Similarly, Dimbleby wonders what Greg Dyke, former BBC director general, makes of the Orwellian “perpetuity edits” demanded by the palace regarding “excisions of reality” from Elizabeth’s funeral where, for example, Edward and Sophie become “visibly upset”.

Like Dimbleby himself, Dyke can’t understand how and why such decisions are made, or even by whom. It’s all a bit mysterious. So is the comparatively recent practice of “monarch’s consent”, whereby the royal places and personnel can be exempted from inconvenient legislation on employment or equal rights. We know it dates back to the 1970s, and was freely given by the prime minister of the day, Ted Heath, but not so much exactly why this is the only entity in the land that may choose to be above certain laws. That, of course, also includes the lack of much meaningful scrutiny of their finances and the fact there is no official public inventory of the paintings and other assets they own, either in their own right or on behalf of the nation – at least £1.2bn worth of gear.

There are lots of nice little stories in the programme to entrance collectors of royal gossip. The late Queen, for example, hiding in the bushes at Buckingham Palace so she didn’t have to bump into the monstrous Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu as he took a stroll in the gardens. But the big scandals and challenges are all explored with skill and an even-handed touch – and the major televisual milestones all properly revisited. These include rarely glimpsed footage of the 1969 documentary The Royal Family (firmly locked in a metaphorical vault by the palace), the then Prince Charles’s confession of adultery to Jonathan Dimbleby in 1994, the now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s disastrous Newsnight interview in 2019 and Harry and Meghan spilling the beans to Oprah Winfrey.

We also see Dimbleby dissecting how apparently innocent exchanges between Prince William and a visiting Canadian comedian, Eugene Levy, are subtly manipulative in their image-building – the future king arrived to meet Levy on an electric scooter, and made several references to his late grandmother. Dimbleby rightly picks up on William’s apparently casual (but surely calculated) remark that “change is definitely on my agenda”, asking what he means by such “dangerous” words – “What’s the King going to say? It’s not that easy to change.”

The one glaring omission in this otherwise majestic survey of the past, present and future is the interview that Diana, Princess of Wales, gave to Martin Bashir on the BBC 30 years ago. At the time, it was a sensation and devastating about Camilla – “there were three of us in that marriage” – but its problematic origins have airbrushed it from the scene, never to be acknowledged. Yet it too happened, 200 million saw it worldwide, and it’s part of our history – and somehow not even David Dimbleby can be allowed to use a clip of it. Further evidence, were it needed, of how the Windsors’ influence (probably William in this case) melds into actual, if invisible, power, no doubt also exercised, as Dimbleby suggests, by the secret dealings of the King with his ministers. It seems that sway also applies within the BBC, with which the palace has been intertwined for a century.

Teenager, 16, killed in minibus crash near school is named

A sixth-form student who died in a crash involving a minibus carrying nine teenagers has been named – as her school issued a statement on the “unimaginable tragedy”.

Eleanor Hague, 16, known as Ellie, from Sherburn in Elmet, died in the incident involving a white Mercedes Sprinter minibus and a Hyundai i10 car near Tadcaster Grammar School on Monday at 12.30pm.

Ellie, a sixth-form student at the school, was a passenger on the minibus which was carrying nine teenagers aged 16 to 18 – both from her school and Sherburn High School.

Another teenage girl was taken to hospital with serious injuries that are not believed to be life-threatening.

The other passengers and the man driving the minibus sustained minor injuries, police said.

In a statement issued on social media, Tadcaster Grammar School said: “We are deeply saddened by the incident that occurred yesterday which involved the tragic loss of one of our students.

“Our heartfelt thoughts are with everyone affected by this unimaginable tragedy. We are totally committed to providing every member of our school community with unwavering support and empathy as we come together as one.

“Appropriate support will be available on site tomorrow, with school open to all students and staff.”

The driver of the Hyundai, a 40-year-old woman from Leeds, was arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving, the force said.

She had been released on conditional bail.

Police were appealing for witnesses and anyone with dashcam footage to contact the force.

Sienna Miller is busting the final pregnancy taboo in plain sight

Time was, mothers were expected to “hide away” as soon as they started “showing” their baby bumps – and not just in the 1950s.

The expectations placed on pregnant women to be “very demure, very mindful” (and very discreet) were still in place as recently 14 years ago, when I was shopping for maternity wear: all I found were giant, wafty caftans and “secret” breastfeeding aprons; vest-tops with hidden snap clasps to get your boobs out and huge tents you were expected to smother both yourself and your future baby beneath, so nobody could see you nursing.

Which is why it was so refreshing to see Sienna Miller sashaying onto the red carpet with pride at this week’s Fashion Awards – for not only did she and Ellie Goulding both get their bumps out, loud and proud, but Miller bared it all as an older mother. And we all know that that is the final pregnancy taboo, right there.

At 43, the actor – who is expecting her second child with her partner, Oli Green – is considered medically a “geriatric mother“, for the term kicks in for anyone pregnant over the age of 35 (and believe me, that’s exactly how you’re referred to in the hospital, which is just peachy for the self-confidence). Yet Miller – who is already mother to daughter Marlowe, 13, with her ex, Tom Sturridge, as well as to a 23-month-old daughter with Green, who is 28 – clearly doesn’t give a monkey’s about showing off her bump.

And nor should she – we’ve come a long way since the idea that a blossoming baby belly is somehow shameful or scandalous as per the legacy of the Victorian era, when women would hide their pregnancies with specially designed maternity corsets loosened with side lacing, layered clothing and empire waistlines. Being visibly pregnant was viewed as “indecent” – and pregnant women were hidden away in “confinement” until their babies were born.

Yet even now – despite stars like Demi Moore doing that cover for Vanity Fair in the nude while seven months pregnant in 1991; Rihanna rocking the Met Gala in a pinstripe skirt, tuxedo jacket and bump; Beyoncé’s achingly beautiful Instagram shot announcing that she was pregnant with twins; Khloe Kardashian, who dressed her human bauble in silver tassels for a Keeping Up With the Kardashians Christmas celebration; J-Lo, who glowed on the red carpet in flowing white Versace; or Serena Williams, who draped her belly in gorgeous green at the Met Gala in 2017 – there’s still something deliciously transgressive about it; something eyebrow-raising about being given public access to a woman’s body at such a private time.

Perhaps I’m projecting: speaking as someone who has been pregnant – twice – and knows how every inch of your body feels like a marvel. When you’re carrying a baby, you become hypersensitive to touch, sound and every single ache and twist and lurch. You know each stage of the baby’s development intimately: from tiny sunflower seed to giant watermelon.

You’re also encouraged implicitly and explicitly – as an older mother (like Miller, I had my second child relatively late at 35) – to hide away in the shadows for fear of seeming “past it”, for showing off the horror of not only stretch marks, linea nigra and cellulite, but wrinkles and greying hair, too. We all know that ageism is a problem – you only need to look at the way women are pressured to use Botox and fillers, plus the rise of the “lifted” face, to realise getting older “naturally” in Western society simply isn’t an option – but add age to pregnancy and you’re really fighting a patriarchal battle. And it’s one which, like it or not, women simply can’t win.

Which is precisely why Miller’s presence on the red carpet is so welcome. It may seem like a small, inconsequential thing, but look at what we’re fighting to begin with: we know that mothers spend less time in paid work and more time working part-time, meaning they miss out on earnings growth associated with more experience (and according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies, the pay gap between similarly educated mothers and fathers widens over a period of 20 years after a mother returns to work, leading to a discrepancy of 30 per cent less per hour).

We are all well aware of the gender pay gap, but refine that to mothers and it becomes even more stark and glaring: “young” mothers (those who give birth before the age of 33) are paid a whopping 15 per cent less than their childless peers, according to an analysis carried out for the Trades Union Congress (TUC) by the Institute for Public Policy Research in 2016. And one in nine mothers (11 per cent) report being dismissed, made redundant, or treated so poorly they felt they had to leave their job, according to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. That’s 54,000 competent and capable women wiped out of the British workforce, every single year.

And when it comes to older mothers, well – more than a third of women aged 50+ (36 per cent, or 4.1m) in England say they have experienced discrimination on the grounds of their age, sex or race, while a recent study in the US found the rhetoric around older motherhood to be “ageist, ableist and out of step with current childbirth trends”. That’ll be the “geriatric mothers”, again.

It’s no surprise that this kind of stigma makes older mums feel like they should hide away – we’re viewed as “unnatural” or “irresponsible”, guilty of having kids “too late” (when nobody bats an eyelid at Al Pacino having a baby at the age of 84). It’s a toxic conversational cocktail that strikes when you’re already feeling awkward and uncomfortable, when the last thing you want to do is be scrutinised and dissected.

That’s why Miller’s defiant appearance in the glare of the red carpet is so important. It’s not only vital representation for giving birth in your forties, it’s also sticking a middle finger up at the idea of “keeping mum”.

Holly Willoughby fined after crash involving moped rider

TV presenter Holly Willoughby has been fined over £1,600 for driving without due care and attention after a collision left a moped rider injured.

The 44-year-old pleaded guilty by post to the charge at Lavender Hill Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, but was absent from the hearing.

Court documents state she drove her Mini Cooper without due care near her home in Richmond, south-west London, on August 28.

Police were called to Church Road, Barnes, following reports of the collision.

The rider of the moped, a 43-year-old man, was taken to hospital, and his injuries were assessed as neither life-threatening nor life-changing.

Willoughby was fined £1,653 alongside £130 in costs and a £661 victim surcharge and given six points on her licence, the Metropolitan Police said.

The presenter is best known for previously fronting ITV daytime show This Morning, which she left in October 2023, and Dancing On Ice.

Education for all: How your skills could make you a great teacher

From construction and engineering to hospitality and beauty, Further Education teaching opens up doors to a wide range of careers. Encompassing a range of technical and vocational courses and qualifications for those over 16 who aren’t studying for a degree, it offers a more hands on, industry-led approach to learning.

Further Education offers a more focused, vocational approach and a fast-track into the workplace. It allows you to build on your existing skills and experience while shaping the next generation of professionals in your field. To find out more, we spoke to Further Education students and teachers about how it works and what they get out of it.

Further Education qualifications can be started from the age of 16. “It’s a step up from school but it doesn’t involve so much independent learning and research as many Higher Education degrees,” explains Susan Simmonds, 52, a Further Education lecturer in Land and Wildlife Management at Sparsholt College Hampshire. “During this time, learners gain so much maturity and a qualification that can take them out into industry,”

Sometimes this study might be full-time in college, while other Further Education opportunities offer apprenticeships, with students gaining qualifications while working on the job. Overall, the courses are generally more practical and directly linked to industry and preparing learners for their future careers. “These courses give students a wide range of relevant experience, knowledge and skills during a time when they’re maturing, and becoming ready to transition into the world of work,” Susan says.

There are often myths and misconceptions about the world of Further Education. From the learner side, many people don’t necessarily realise the opportunities available to them through Further Education, as Meri, 17, who is studying an Extended Technical Diploma in Land and Wildlife Management Level 3 at Sparsholt College, explains. “Many people I have spoken to don’t realise there are multiple ways to prepare for a career in industry, and that courses like mine can open those doors.”

For Meri, it’s been a really positive experience, and one that has helped prepare her for the workplace. “The college has a lot of contacts with industry and the assignments we do are similar to professional reports.” Meanwhile, Zach, 17, who is on the same course, has also thrived at the Further Education college: “I have been able to meet far more friends and great people and I feel as though it has helped me grow. It’s also provided many opportunities to experience real-world practical work.”

For those training or working as Further Education teachers, often after years spent in a specific industry sector, it’s the students that make their new career so rewarding. David Hobson, 54, who teaches the Motor Vehicle course at Stockton Riverside College, found that the job satisfaction he gets from sharing his personal know-how with the next generation of workers has kept him in Further Education teaching for 16 years. “The benefits of passing on my skills to young people keep me going. It’s an opportunity for me to equip learners with the industry skills and knowledge they need to succeed in their careers”

Susan, who teaches Further Education part-time alongside her work as a Community Ecologist, has had a similar experience: “I find the work really energising. Young people are so full of life and enthusiasm that I come home feeling uplifted.”

Whether it’s part-time alongside your current job or a switch to full-time teaching, Further Education teaching can be a really rewarding and valuable career move.

Teaching in a mixture of colleges (often General Further Education Colleges or Sixth Form Colleges) and Adult and Community Learning Centres, as well as workplace and apprenticeship settings, it can fit around your life and other commitments. While typical full-time contracts are around 35 hours a week, there are also some part-time or flexible options available.

Real world industry experience across a wide range of jobs can set you on a path to becoming a Further Education teacher, with opportunities in everything from construction and healthcare, to engineering, digital, hospitality, tourism and beauty. You don’t always need teaching qualifications to start teaching in further education, you can undertake training on the job which is often funded by your employer.

If, like Susan and David, you see the appeal of sharing the industry knowledge and skills you’ve developed with the next generation, exploring the option of becoming a Further Education teacher can be a great next step. As David points out, “You won’t know how enjoyable it is until you try it.”

Looking for a new role that’s rewarding, flexible and draws on your current career? Why not consider sharing your experience where it matters most – helping inspire the next generation of workers in the field you love? Visit the Further Education website to find out more

Stephen Fry backs appeal to save land around iconic Cerne Abbas Giant

An appeal has been launched to acquire the land surrounding Dorset’s iconic Cerne Abbas Giant.

The National Trust aims to raise £330,000 to fund the purchase and care of 138 hectares adjacent to the famous landmark.

Over £2 million has already been secured for the acquisition of the area, known as Giant’s Lair, which includes Giant Hill and its diverse wildlife.

The campaign is backed by actor Sir Stephen Fry and Countryfile presenter Sean Fletcher.

Sir Stephen said: “This is a very rare opportunity to protect a huge swathe of beautiful and biodiverse countryside surrounding the Cerne Abbas Giant.

“Please join me in supporting this appeal.”

Designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest, Giant Hill is already home to 36 butterfly species.

Purchasing the land would allow the charity to restore and care for sections of chalk grassland, plant new woodland, and create a mosaic of habitats that support species under threat and help wildlife adapt to climate change.

Hannah Jefferson, general manager for West Dorset & Cranborne Chase, said: “This is an exciting and unique opportunity to give nature a huge boost in Dorset.

“The land we’re acquiring is extraordinary – it’s home to everything from our huge 55-metre Anglo-Saxon chalk figure to a small butterfly with a three-centimetre wingspan.

“By protecting the area around the giant, we can restore a fully functioning ecosystem that supports species under threat and allows wildlife to thrive across the site.”

Ms Jefferson said the land is both ecologically and archaeologically significant.

“Research shows the giant itself dates from the early medieval period, while the surrounding landscape has been important to people for thousands of years, with evidence of human activity stretching back to 4300 BC.

“Since the National Trust began caring for the giant in 1920, we’ve worked to protect its heritage and wildlife – and this appeal is the next step in that journey.”

Jenny Plackett, from Butterfly Conservation, said: “Following a long legacy of work with the current landowner to maintain the vitally important habitat at Cerne Abbas for rare butterflies, we will be delighted to see the trust take this forward.

“Securing the future for these vulnerable species at this site will be a great achievement for nature.”

Donations can be made online at: www.nationaltrust.org.uk/cerne-giant-appeal

The National Trust hopes to raise the funds by the end of January 2026.

Boy died of brain cancer less than 12 months after first symptom

A new review suggests children with brain tumours face “uneven” NHS care depending on where they live.

The Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission conducted a review of the UK’s paediatric neuro-oncology system, examining 15 out of 17 services, identifying gaps in the care that children with brain tumours may face, from testing to wraparound care and a lack of access to clinical trials in some parts of the country.

The authors of the report said there is a “lack of standardisation” in quality of care for patients, which can lead to “substantial variation” in important services, including psychological care, rehabilitation, or play therapy.

“This key challenge is apparent in patient feedback, which demonstrates uneven experiences and outcomes for children and their families, depending on where they receive treatment,” the authors wrote.

“There are notable disparities in access to clinical trial opportunities… a particular challenge is ensuring patients who live far from large academic centres can still participate in new research.”

Louise Fox, whose son George died from a glioblastoma in 2022 when he was just 13, said it is “not fair” that a child’s care can depend on where they live.

The 51-year-old, from Bedfordshire, said: “George was a bright, kind and caring boy who dreamed of becoming an architect and loved Lego, Arsenal and golden retrievers.

“George had a devastating 11.5 months from the first headache to losing his life, one he so desperately wanted to live to its fullest.

“During his illness, we encountered moments of exceptional care but we also faced stark disparities in access geographically and in support services.

“It became heartbreakingly clear: whether a child lives in London, Newcastle, or a small town or village can determine the treatment journey they receive. This is not fair.

“Every child deserves the best care, wherever they live.”

The review’s other findings include:

Dame Tessa, a former Labour cabinet minister, died from a brain tumour in 2018.

Nicky Huskens, chief executive of the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission, said: “For the first time, we have a detailed national picture of where care for children with a brain tumour excels and where it falls short.

“This study shows that, for children with a brain tumour in the UK, whereabouts in the country they live, and whether they live in a city or in a rural area, can affect their treatment and care.

“The treatment and care of children with a brain tumour should not be impacted by their postcode.

“The task is now to turn the insights in this study into action, and ensure every child has access to the highest standards of treatment, care and research.

“Already, centres in the study are making significant, targeted improvements.”

The organisation has created a “road map” to improve treatment and care for children with brain tumours, which includes key recommendations from the report.

Dr Karen Noble, director of research, policy and innovation at the charity Brain Tumour Research, said: “Children with brain tumours are being denied access to clinical trials due to inconsistent routine testing or lengthy turnaround times for results.

“Whole genome sequencing of brain tumour tissue reveals powerful information that unlocks access to clinical trials based on cancer biology rather than location in the body. Without it, the pool of trials that patients can be part of shrinks.

“We are calling on governments across the UK to ensure that 100 per cent of brain tumour patients are offered genome sequencing and that access to clinical trials is expanded.

“The technology is there – let’s use it to make a difference. Together we can find a cure.”