China's suspicion of interference should not stop fair comment on Hong Kong affairs

The National People's Congress Standing Committee decision on the modus for election of the chief executive in 2017 was well prepared. In many ways, the government's case was understandable: it should have been obvious that nobody would be able to run in 2017 as the "anti-Beijing" candidate.

More worrying was the "national security" issue raised in the explanation of its decision; the fear of "foreign interference". After all, Hong Kong's prosperity depends on its international friends and business partners.

Who is the potential enemy, anyway? The obvious answer is the US, of whose strategic interests in East Asia China is understandably suspicious. But much of the suspicion also appears to be directed at the UK. In particular, China has taken exception to the intention of the British parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee to compile a report on the implementation of the 1984 Joint Declaration. The committee's chairman, Richard Ottaway, has been explicitly warned off what is described as "interference in China's internal affairs". Threats have been made of a "downgrading" of Sino-British relations.

But what actually constitutes "interference"? The purpose of a parliamentary select committee - it is not part of the government - is to hold the British government to account, not foreign governments. The committee has no power and no aspiration to intervene in Hong Kong's affairs.

The workings of parliament are established by procedures developed over hundreds of years; they are also British internal affairs. Nor can the government apply pressure to a select committee to drop an investigation; that would be a gross breach of procedure. China has her system: we have ours.

Thus, it was inappropriate for China to threaten the UK government with punishment for the activities of a body over which it has no control.