Share
Tweet
Share
Share
ShareSummary: Ed Miliband has come under fire after dodging questions about a so-called “secret China deal” 17 times during a Commons committee session. The Energy Secretary refused to publish full details of a clean energy agreement with Beijing, fuelling accusations of a two-tier transparency approach and raising fresh concerns about security, supply chains and Labour’s relationship with China.
Miliband Repeatedly Avoids Direct Answer
According to GB News, Energy Secretary Ed Miliband dodged a question about a “secret China deal” 17 times during what has been described as an “astonishing exchange” in the Commons Energy Security and Net Zero Committee.
Tory MP Bradley Thomas pressed Miliband on whether the agreement with China included sensitive commitments.
“Given that acknowledged caution, the sort of topics that Parliament deserves to see the detail on include whether this deal involves commitments not to complain to China about slave labour being used in solar production and supply chains, commitments to maintain resilience on and maintain reliance on Chinese supply chains.”
Miliband did admit that China poses security risks to Britain’s energy system. But instead of directly addressing the substance of the question, he repeatedly deflected.
“Do ask me, Mr Thomas, any questions you like about our relationship to China.”
He returned to similar wording again and again as pressure mounted. In total, he avoided the core question 17 times before offering a broader defence.
“With certain countries, we have certain approaches and with others we have other approaches. So have previous Governments.”
That answer did not satisfy critics.
What Is In The China Energy Agreement?
China and the UK agreed in March last year to co-operate on areas including power grids, battery storage, offshore wind power and green hydrogen, according to Chinese media reports.
Nearly a year on, the full details of the arrangement have not been published.
Miliband argued that previous governments also kept similar agreements confidential. However, critics pointed out that other energy deals, including agreements with countries such as Korea, Germany and Ireland, have been made public.
Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho accused him of operating a double standard.
“This is an astonishing exchange. Ed Miliband dodges the question SEVENTEEN TIMES on why he won’t publish his secret China deal. What is he trying to hide?”
She added:
“Unlike the deals I signed with Korea, Germany, or Ireland, or the other deals Ed’s ministers have signed in office, the full text remains a secret.”
When she raised the issue in the Commons, Miliband dismissed her concerns sharply.
“May I give the Lady a piece of advice? Wacky conspiracy theories that she gets on the internet are no substitute for a proper policy.”
Transparency Or Two-Tier Treatment?
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero defended the approach, saying publication was not routine.
“The previous Government did not publish its last agreement with China, and it is not routine that agreements of this kind are made publicly available.”
“Our Memorandum of Understanding with China renewed a partnership that has been in place for over ten years, and facilitates the sharing of research and ideas to support the global clean energy transition.”
Officials also argued that releasing details “would increase public knowledge about our relations with the Chinese government”, stressing the agreement was made in confidence.
But this is where the political temperature rises.
Miliband has acknowledged China poses security risks. At the same time, Britain’s energy transition is becoming increasingly reliant on imported solar panels, battery components and supply chains where China dominates production.
For many voters, especially those concerned about national resilience and strategic independence, the concern is simple. If there is nothing controversial in the deal, why not publish it?
Critics describe it as a two-tier transparency system. Open with friendly nations. Quiet with Beijing.
Energy policy is no longer just about climate targets. It is about security, supply chains and sovereignty.
The longer the text remains unpublished, the louder the suspicion becomes.
