PRESSURE mounted on Labour’s National Security Adviser today after a Cabinet Minister refused to rule out his role in the collapse of the Chinese spy trial.
Bridget Phillipson insisted Sir Keir Starmer’s ally Jonathan Powell “had no role in substance or evidence” surrounding the case.


But the Education Secretary stopped short of confirming the security chief was not involved at all in the trial’s downfall.
Asked about Mr Powell’s role, Ms Phillipson told the BBC: “I can give you that reassurance, he did not have those conversations around the substance or the evidence of the case.”
The case against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry – accused of spying for Beijing – collapsed last month after prosecutors said ministers failed to provide proof confirming whether China was considered a national security threat at the time of the alleged offences.
Sir Keir has blamed the former Tory government, insisting China had not been formally designated a threat when the alleged crimes took place.
But Labour insiders have claimed Mr Powell was responsible for the decision not to hand over the key evidence prosecutors needed.
Ministers are expected to be hauled into the Commons tomorrow to explain exactly how and why the trial was abandoned.
Both the CPS and senior Tory figures have suggested the government’s current explanation doesn’t cut it – and fails to reveal who decided not to label China an enemy.
This morning Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel insisted the communist state was designated a threat by the previous Tory government – but within “classified information”.
She said: “We knew that China was an adversary, a real threat to us.
“I saw that, obviously in ways in which I can’t disclose now, I saw that through classified information – our agencies, our intelligence and security agencies, were saying that throughout, and have been saying that consistently.”
Ms Patel added that regardless of Mr Powell’s involvement, ministers must shoulder the blame.
She told the BBC Attorney General Lord Richard Hermer “should come to Parliament and account for what has happened.”
She said: “There are plenty of unanswered questions… about why this case failed, and why it was not going further for prosecution – we should have Government ministers come into Parliament, they have a duty, this is a case involving the national security of our country.
“Instead, all we’ve had in Parliament is a junior minister saying that they are deeply disappointed.
“How can they just be deeply disappointed when China is a threat to our national security?”