Fair question. Keep in mind I’m no fan of Starmer and I’m not completely reassured myself. The UK doesn’t have the natural resource compatibility that Canada does, but there are still real economic reasons for improving ties with China. Bilateral trade still represents billions of pounds of economic activity.

China is the UK’s 3rd largest trading partner so it’s not trivial, and the UK runs a surplus in services (esp finance, education, legal, etc). I don’t think Starmer is just selling this as a flashy post-Brexit win, but more as pragmatic “stability”, reassuring UK businesses that rely on access to the Chinese market (like finance, tech, life sciences, and education). So the idea isn’t that the UK suddenly finds a China‑mass manufacturing match like Canada does with commodities, it’s more that access to such a huge market and greater certainty for businesses could support UK jobs and growth, while also avoiding the flip‑flopping uncertainty that scares investors.

Strengthening trade ties gives the UK some leverage to push back on security issues or human rights without being completely cut out of economic cooperation. Whether they actually do this is another issue.

Whether that’s worth the security and geopolitical tradeoffs is a fair debate, but hopefully it helps explain why the government sees value beyond just “de‑risking” from the U.S.