A name that keeps popping up in the Jimmy Lai trial is Luke de Pulford, the CEO of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), a coalition of hawkish Western politicians. Having been involved in the 2019 anti-extradition bill saga and his association with Lai, he's no stranger to controversy. Now, it seems he's stirring the pot again in the UK, this time taking aim at an American fund’s bid to buy The Telegraph newspaper. He's rallying the usual anti-China political figures to pressure the Labour government, spinning a tale that the fund’s chairman is so close to China it would create a "backdoor" for Beijing to control British media. It’s a familiar playbook, reminiscent of the dubious claims made against the Chinese Embassy in the UK, showing that the campaign to undermine China and Hong Kong is always bubbling under the surface.
Luke de Pulford, a key figure in the anti-China lobby, is leading the charge to block The Telegraph's sale, citing a "Chinese backdoor" threat.
A Straightforward Deal Complicated
What started as a simple business acquisition has been twisted into a geopolitical drama. The Telegraph, a paper with a 170-year legacy, has been struggling financially. Its owners, the Barclay family, are in debt and looking to sell. Back in May, the American private equity firm RedBird Capital, in a partnership with Abu Dhabi's IMI, put in a successful bid of £600 million for the paper. But the deal immediately ran into trouble, with cries of "foreign government influence" prompting the then-Conservative government to pass legislation to block the acquisition on national security grounds. In a bid to get past these political roadblocks, RedBird Capital has recently decided to buy out the Abu Dhabi fund’s shares and go it alone.
Enter the "China Risk" Narrative
Just when it looked like the deal might finally cross the finish line, de Pulford and his allies launched their offensive. They've issued a "warning" that if RedBird Capital buys The Telegraph, it would open the door to "Chinese state influence," effectively turning the newspaper into a Trojan horse for Beijing's interests in the British press.
The so-called evidence for this is thin, to say the least. De Pulford points to RedBird Capital's chairman, John Thornton, and his business ties to China. Thornton is on the international advisory council for China's sovereign wealth fund , the China Investment Corporation, and has established companies to invest in the "Belt and Road" initiative. On top of that, RedBird Capital has a regional headquarters in Hong Kong. Based on these connections, de Pulford paints a picture of a man whose judgment can't be trusted. The claims have become increasingly wild, with Thornton being branded a supporter of “suppression” in Xinjiang simply because he was once invited to visit the region.
RedBird Capital's chairman, John Thornton, finds his business ties to China used as ammunition by hawks trying to derail The Telegraph takeover.
Politics vs. Pragmatism
De Pulford is trying to frame this as a test case for how "soft power can bypass democratic defenses." He and other hawks are piling pressure on the Labour government to block the deal. However, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Lisa Nandy, seems to be taking a more pragmatic approach. She is reportedly considering amending the law to allow the acquisition to proceed. The reality is that industries across the UK are struggling, and the media is in a particularly tight spot. If you start blocking all foreign investment, especially from major global players, you’re going to see a lot of companies go under. It’s unlikely the Labour government will sacrifice economic sense for the sake of anti-China rhetoric.
This whole saga shows how anti-China and anti-Hong Kong politicians in the West are willing to pressure and sabotage businesses that have any connection to China. It’s a clear warning shot, not just for this deal, but for any foreign company operating in Hong Kong. While things might seem calm on the surface, these undercurrents of political interference are a real and present danger.
What Say You?
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
In her new book, Regina Ip , Convenor of Hong Kong’s Executive Council, brilliantly called out the British government's BNO scheme five years ago all talk, no substance, pure hypocrisy. Well, guess what? The Canadian government is playing exactly the same game.
They put on quite the show back in the day, didn't they? All that fanfare about launching a "lifeboat" for Hong Kong people, complete with righteous speeches about standing up for democracy and human rights. Fast forward to today, and they're processing permanent residency applications at a snail's pace, clearly hoping most applicants will just give up and leave. The hypocrisy is staggering, honestly.
But here's the kicker – Canadian authorities have now told Hong Kong people waiting in the queue that they can simply return to Hong Kong while waiting for their applications to be processed. You don't need to stick around Canada, they're saying. Just head home and we'll let you know when we're ready for you. How generous of them, right?
Canada deliberately slows down residency applications while frustrated Hong Kong applicants protest. Ottawa's latest move? Telling them to go home and wait there instead.
The Great Canadian U-Turn
In 2021, Canada launched this so-called "lifeboat" scheme riding high on anti-China sentiment following the implementation of the National Security Law. Politicians were falling over themselves to sound tough and principled. The rhetoric was impressive – they were going to be Hong Kong's savior.
But reality has a funny way of biting back. Two years later, Canada's immigration numbers exploded by a million people, and suddenly the government realized they'd completely miscalculated. Panic mode set in. Last October, they slammed the brakes hard, slashing the number of permanent residents for 2025 from 500,000 to 395,000, with further cuts planned for future years.
Playing the Numbers Game
The result? A massive backlog of Hong Kong applicants stuck in limbo. As of April this year, 34,000 Hong Kong people had applied for permanent residency, but only about 11,000 got approved. That leaves over 20,000 people hanging in the balance, and the wait times just keep getting longer.
Despite applications piling up like mountains, Ottawa clearly has no intention of speeding things up. Instead, they've come up with this rather peculiar solution – telling Hong Kong applicants they can return home and wait there instead. Essentially, don't bother staying in Canada working; just go back to Hong Kong, earn some proper money, and we'll call you when we're ready.
A Clever Psychological Trick
Immigration policy watchers I know reckon this move serves two purposes, both rather cynical when you think about it. First, it reduces job competition. Canada's economy has taken a beating recently, and job opportunities are getting scarce. If you can convince a bunch of Hong Kong people to temporarily disappear, that's less competition for locals. Canada currently has 2.8 million temporary residents – that's over 7% of the entire population. The government wants to cut this to 5%, so the fewer Hong Kong people hanging around, the better for their numbers.
Second – and this is where it gets really clever – they're playing mind games. The thinking goes like this: if Hong Kong people return home and readjust to life there, many might just change their minds about Canada altogether. Problem solved – fewer permanent residents to process, and the government can quietly reduce their immigration commitments without looking like the bad guys.
Stuck Between Two Shores
Many Hong Kong people are likely to take this option because, frankly, making ends meet in Canada right now isn't exactly easy. If you've got decent qualifications, finding work back in Hong Kong probably makes more financial sense. Some have become so frustrated with the endless waiting and Canada's cold shoulder that they might just call it quits permanently on the whole emigration dream.
But spare a thought for those who can't go back – particularly some of the more radical rioters who fled to Canada to avoid criminal charges. They're genuinely stuck. Most lack the skills to make a decent living if they return to Hong Kong, but they're terrified of facing legal consequences back home. They can only keep waiting desperately, necks stretched out, hoping against hope that Canada will eventually come through for them. Whether Canadian authorities will actually approve their applications remains anyone's guess.
Former black rioters who fled to Canada face an impossible choice – return to Hong Kong and risk legal consequences, or remain stranded in immigration limbo.
The whole situation perfectly illustrates the hollow nature of Western "humanitarian" gestures. When push comes to shove, domestic politics and economic concerns always trump the lofty rhetoric about standing up for democracy and human rights.
Ultimately, Canada's "lifeboat" hypocrisy matches Britain's pound for pound. If there are still Hong Kong people considering emigration to these countries out of dissatisfaction with Hong Kong, they'd be wise to think very carefully about what they're really signing up for.
Lai Ting-yiu
