British MPs warn of dependence on China
A parliamentary committee calls the supply of critical minerals vulnerable for defence, the energy transition and AI.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
.jpg){kind=link}
The British Parliament warns that the United Kingdom remains too dependent on China for critical raw materials. The Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee is urging the government to fund alternative mining, processing and recycling more quickly.
The warning appears in a report published on Thursday. According to the committee, the United Kingdom cannot expand its defence industry, carry out the energy transition or build sufficient AI infrastructure without more reliable access to critical minerals.
These include raw materials needed for electronics, batteries, magnets, energy infrastructure and defence applications. The committee says China has a dominant position in parts of the mining and processing of rare earth metals. In its strategy for 2035, the British government acknowledges that the country will remain dependent on imports even with increased domestic production.
The MPs find that the government is currently not convincingly meeting any of the ten conditions drawn up by the committee for targeted risk reduction. They point to inadequate geological information, high energy costs for domestic processing and the fact that 80 per cent of British metal waste is exported rather than recycled domestically.
The committee proposes a five-part plan. It includes more domestic mining, processing and recycling, better demand forecasts and cooperation with allies. The committee also wants a financing facility for critical minerals that can combine loans, equity capital and long-term offtake agreements.
The British strategy does not pursue complete independence. According to the government document, future demand cannot be met through domestic production alone. The United Kingdom therefore wants to work with, among others, the European Union, the United States, Canada, Australia, India and Japan, while maintaining its trading relationship with China.
The debate is relevant to Dutch and European companies because the same raw materials are needed for chips, electric vehicles, wind turbines, networks and defence systems. Diversification could improve security of supply, but new mines and processing plants take years and may be more expensive than existing Chinese supply chains. The committee cites projects that could cost up to 3 billion dollars.
The report is a parliamentary recommendation, not a government decision. It is therefore still uncertain which measures London will adopt and how they will relate to European raw-materials and industrial policy.
Also show where in Europe and in the world
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- A British parliamentary committee has criticised policy on critical minerals.
- The committee links raw materials to defence, AI and the energy transition.
- The British government expects to remain dependent on imports in the future as well.
- China has a dominant position in parts of the rare-earth-metals supply chain.
Left
Arguments The government must actively secure strategic raw materials and deploy public funding, because the market does not fully account for social and security risks. Diversification should go hand in hand with labour, environmental and human-rights standards.
Values Public control, social justice, sustainability and resilience against geopolitical pressure.
Consequences Public investment could accelerate the transition, but the costs could reach society and businesses through taxes or higher prices.
Centre
Arguments Complete decoupling from China is not realistic. A targeted approach involving allies, stock management, recycling and clear risk analyses can limit the most vulnerable dependencies without ending all trade.
Values Pragmatism, international cooperation and economic stability.
Consequences A mixed strategy could reduce supply risks, but it requires long-term investment and clear priorities.
Right
Arguments Defence and industrial capacity require national control over essential supply chains. The government should make room for mining and private investment, while preventing bureaucracy and high energy costs from making projects unviable.
Values National security, competitiveness and entrepreneurship.
Consequences Faster permits and support could stimulate production, but may clash with nature protection and local interests.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The factual claims about the report, the British strategy, recycling and the proposed financing have been checked against parliamentary and government sources. The text presents possible consequences for European companies as relevant, not as proven direct harm.
- confirmed The British parliamentary committee published a report on 5 November 2026 about dependence on Chinese critical minerals. — The publication date and subject appear on the committee’s webpage. source
- confirmed The committee says that 80 per cent of British metal waste is exported rather than recycled at home. — This percentage appears in the report summary. source
- confirmed The British strategy states that China controls 70 per cent of rare-earth-metals mining and 90 per cent of refining. — The figures appear in Vision 2035. source
- confirmed The committee cites projects that could cost up to 3 billion dollars. — The amount appears in the proposal for allied buyers’ clubs. source
Editor's note
The new event is the publication of a parliamentary report. The risks and recommendations mentioned are the committee’s positions; they do not constitute established evidence that China will actually block supplies.Sources
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „kritieke mineralen”
- RTL Nieuws — „kritieke mineralen”
- FD — „kritieke mineralen”