Why is the planned China embassy in London so controversial?
Sir Keir Starmer given ultimatum as Beijing frustrated by decision that keeps being delayed
China has reportedly criticised the British government’s delays over granting planning permission for a so-called “super embassy” in London.
Listen to this article
Housing secretary Steve Reed has pushed back a deadline on the ruling from October 21 to December 10, which marked the second time that a decision was deferred.
Read also: UK delays decision on China's super-embassy in London amid Beijing spying row
It is the latest coming together of London and Beijing’s governments, after developments in the spy scandal that has seen two Brits accused of supplying intel.
Sir Keir Starmer has now been warned that he could expect “consequences” if Britain does not immediately “honour its obligations”.
Here is the story explained.
What is the Chinese super-embassy?
China wants to upgrade its current embassy in Portland Place near Regent’s Park, in central London, and move to a much-larger premises in the heart of the financial capital.
The country purchased the site of the proposed new embassy at Royal Mint Court, near the Tower of London, for £255 million in 2018, with the building having been out of use since 1975.
The 20,000 square metre proposed complex would make it the largest embassy in Europe if it got the green light and space is thought to be a factor, even if China has not spelled out why it wants to move.
What happened after 2018?
Plans for the embassy were rejected by the local Tower Hamlets Council in 2022.
China did not appeal the Tower Hamlets decision but did resubmitted the application a fortnight after Sir Keir’s election victory last year.
Beijing believed Labour may be more receptive to the application, and the plans were called in so ministers would make the final decision after president Xi Jinping approached Sir Keir.
Why has the decision been delayed?
The plans for the huge embassy have sparked concerns given its proximity to London's financial hub, with China having been accused of espionage by the UK in the past.
Protesters took to the streets urging the government to block it earlier this year, raising concerns of Chinese surveillance. Uyghurs, Tibetans, Chinese dissidents and Hong Kongers, all groups who have felt the force of President Xi’s brinkmanship, were among those protesting in London.
A former security minister, Tory MP Tom Tudgendat, said at the time: "[Granting approval] would be a very clear statement that our Government had chosen the wrong side and not the side that was for the defence and protection of the British people and our economic future."
In light of this, then housing secretary Angela Rayner opted to give the decision more time in August, and new secretary Steve Reed has now pushed it back again - to the irritation of China.
No. 10 has said: “Given the detailed nature of the representations that have been provided, and the need to give parties sufficient opportunity to respond, MHCLG (The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) consider that more time is needed for full consideration of the applications."
Why is the embassy controversial?
The “super-embassy” has been challenged for a number of reasons, most of which are due to unease around allegations of Chinese surveillance.
- Some of the blueprints for the plans of the embassy are greyed out and have no clear use, without any explanation,
- The Cistercian Abbey ruins are currently below the old building and there are reportedly concerns that this might not be kept accessible,
- The espionage concerns are not helped by the fact that Royal Mint Court used to have a wire to City of London's telephone exchange,
- Residents who live nearby have said that they fear being forced out, while there is also a risk that regular anti-China protests could be held in the area.
Lin Jian, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Beijing has acted with “the utmost sincerity and patience”, adding that Britain should “immediately fulfil its obligations and honour its commitments otherwise the British side shall bear all consequences”.
What happens next?
The deadline for the decision has now been pushed back to December 10.