Archived
When the Government signed a deal on net-zero co-operation with Canada, the text of the memorandum was published. So too were the texts of deals with Ireland, Norway, South Korea and Chile.
Five months after the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband signed a similar memorandum with the Chinese government, however, we are still in the dark as to precisely what was agreed.
Chinese media have asserted that the Energy Secretary agreed to co-operation on power grids, battery storage, offshore wind power and carbon capture, among other areas; it is understood that Chinese investment in the UK was not discussed by Mr Miliband. The role of the Chinese state in Britain’s net-zero ambitions may well be an uncomfortable issue for the Labour Government to discuss.
While the Defence Secretary is insisting that Britain is “ready to fight” over the future of Taiwan and the Foreign Secretary is explicitly referring to China as a “sophisticated and persistent threat” that requires hundreds of millions of pounds in additional funding for the intelligence services, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been courting Chinese investment, and Mr Miliband’s drive to meet his net-zero targets is heavily dependent on Chinese industry.
Both the switch to electric vehicles and the decarbonisation of the energy grid will make heavy use of Chinese products. One study commissioned by the German defence ministry recently warned that this position at the heart of Western energy systems could result in Beijing enjoying the power to trigger remote shut-downs as “an instrument of economic warfare”.
Such concerns are less hypothetical than we might wish. Earlier this year, undocumented communication devices were located in Chinese-made power inverters exported to the United States, triggering fears that Beijing could use compromised equipment to “physically destroy the grid”. This would be fully in line with the current approach of the People’s Liberation Army to warfare as a clash between systems, and the extensive Volt Typhoon operation carried out by Chinese state-sponsored actors.
Even given the understandable desire to avoid a sudden break with China, the delicacy of the balance between trade and reliance is such that the British public deserves to know what Mr Miliband has discussed with Beijing.