Security Update: Official Secrets Act Case Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Cabinet Office
Jim Allister
Main Page: Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice - North Antrim)Department Debates - View all Jim Allister's debates with the Cabinet Office
(1 day, 15 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
It seems to me that the right hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, put her finger on the nub of this matter. We know that in April 2024, the CPS decided that the evidential test was met. The evidential test was that there was a reasonable prospect of conviction for the offence of passing useful information to an enemy. We know that in September ’25, the DPP maintained that the evidential test was not met, so what changed? Who changed it? How did we move from the evidential test being met to the evidential test not being met? Was the evidence before the DPP withdrawn? Was it found to be unreliable, or did the Government fail to substantiate the evidence that enabled the evidential test to be met back in April 2024?
Dan Jarvis
With great respect to the hon. and learned Gentleman, that is what I was at great pains to explain in my opening remarks.