Live Salisbury Incident Statement House of Commons

takes them back into slavery.

Order.

Statement.

First and, to pay tribute to the

professionalism of all the doctors,

nurses and investigation team to

have led the response to this

incident and the fortitude of the

people of Salisbury and let me

reassure them that as Public Health

England have made clear, the ongoing

risk to public health is low and the

Government will continue to do

everything possible to support this

historic city to recover fully. Mr

Speaker, on Monday I set out that

Sergei Skripal and his daughter were

poisoned with a military grade nerve

agent developed by Russia. Based on

this capability, combined with their

record of conducting state-sponsored

assassinations, including against

former intelligence officers whom

they regard as legitimate targets,

the UK Government concluded that it

was highly likely that Russia was

responsible for this reckless and

despicable act. And there were only

too plausible explanations. Either

this was a direct act by the Russian

state against our country or

conceivably the Russian Government

could have lost control of a

military grade nerve agent and

allowed it to get into the hands of

others. Mr Speaker, it was right to

offer Russia the opportunity to

provide an explanation but their

response has demonstrated complete

disdain by the gravity of these

events. They have provided no

credible explanation that could

suggest they lost control of that

nerve agent. No explanation as to

how this agent came to be used in

the United Kingdom. No explanation

as to why Russia has an undeclared

chemical weapons programme in

contravention of international law.

Instead, they have treated the use

of a military grade nerve agent in

Europe with sarcasm, contempt and

defiance. So, Mr Speaker, there is

no alternative conclusion other than

that the Russian state was culpable

for the attempted murder of Sergei

Skripal and his daughter, and for

threatening the lives of other

British citizens in Salisbury,

including Detective Sergeant Nick

Bailey. This presents an unlawful

use of force by the Russian state

against the United Kingdom. And as I

set out on Monday, it has taken

place against the backdrop of a

well-established pattern of Russian

state aggression across Europe and

beyond. It must therefore be met

with a full and robust response

beyond the actions we have already

taken since the murder of Mr

Litvinenko and to counter this

pattern of Russian aggression

elsewhere. As a discussion in this

House made clear, it is essential we

must now come together with our

allies to defend our security, to

stand up for our values, to send a

clear message to those who would

seek to undermine them. This morning

I chaired a further meeting with the

National Security Council, where we

agreed immediate actions to

dismantle the Russian espionage

network in the UK, urgent work to

develop new powers to tackle all

forms of hostile state activity, and

to ensure that those seeking to

carry out such activity cannot enter

the UK, and additional steps to

suspend all planned high-level

contacts between the United Kingdom

and the Russian Federation. Let me

start with the immediate actions. Mr

Speaker, the house will recall that

following the murder of Mr

Litvinenko, the UK expelled for

diplomats. Under the Vienna

Convention, the United Kingdom will

now expel 23 Russian diplomats who

have been identified as undeclared

intelligence officers. They have

just one week to leave. This will be

the single biggest expulsion for

over 30 years and it reflects the

fact that this is not the first time

that the Russian state has acted

against our country. Through these

expulsions, we will fundamentally

degrade Russian intelligence

capability in the UK for years to

come. And if they seek to rebuild

it, we will prevent them from doing

so. Second, we will urgently develop

proposals for new legislative powers

to harden our defences against all

forms of hostile state activity.

This will include the addition of a

targeted power to detain those

suspected of hostile state activity

at the UK border. This power is

currently only permitted in relation

to those suspected of terrorism. And

I have asked the Home Secretary to

consider whether there is a need for

a new counterespionage powers to

clamp down on the full spectrum of

hostile activities of foreign agents

in our country. Mr Speaker, as I set

out on Monday, we will also table a

Government amendment to the

sanctions bill to strengthen our

powers to impose sanctions in

response to the violation of human

rights. In doing so, we will play

our part in international effort to

punish those responsible for the

sorts of abuses suffered by

surrogate Magnitsky. And I hope as

with all the measures I'm up today

that this book the manned

cross-party support. Mr Speaker, we

will also make full use of existing

powers to enhance our efforts to

monitor and track the intentions of

those travelling to the UK who could

be engaged in activity that

threatens the security of the UK and

our allies.

Will freeze the freeze Russian state

assets wherever we have the evidence

that they may be used to threaten

the life or property of UK nationals

or residents, and led by the

National Crime Agency we will

continue to bring all of the

capabilities of UK law enforcement

to bear against serious criminals

and corrupt elites. There is no

place for these people or their

money in our country. Mr Speaker,

let me be clear. While our response

must be robust, it must also remain

true to our values as a liberal

democracy that believes in the rule

of law. Many Russians have made this

country go home, abide by our laws

and make an important contribution

to our country, which we must

continue to welcome. But to those

who seek to do us harm, my message

is simple. You are not welcome here.

Let me turn to our bilateral

relationship. As I said on Monday,

we have had a very simple approach

to Russia, engaged but beware. And I

continue to believe it is not in our

national interests to break off all

dialogue between United Kingdom and

the Russian Federation. But in the

aftermath of this appalling act

against our country, this

relationship cannot be the same. So,

we will suspend all planned

high-level bilateral contacts

between United Kingdom and the

Russian Federation. This includes

revoking the invitation to Foreign

Minister Lavrov to pay a reciprocal

visit to the UK and confirming it

will be no attendance by ministers

or members of the Royal family at

this summer's World Cup in Russia.

Finally, we will deploy a range of

tools from across the full breadth

of national security apparatus in

order to

set out some of these measures

today, members on all sides will

understand that there are some that

cannot be mentioned due to reasons

of national security. There are

other measures we stand ready to

deploy at any time, should we face

further Russian provocation. Mr

Speaker, none of the actions we take

our intended to damage legitimate

activity or prevent contacts between

our populations. We have no

disagreement with the people of

Russia. They have been responsible

for so many great achievements

throughout their history. Many other

us look at a post-Soviet Russia with

hope. We wanted a better

relationship, and it is tragic that

President Putin has chosen to act in

this way. But we will not tolerate

the threat to life of British people

and others on British soil from the

Russian government. Nor will we

tolerate such a flagrant breach of

Russia's international obligations.

Mr Speaker, as I set out on Monday,

the United Kingdom is not standing

alone in confronting Russian

aggression. In the last ten to four

hours I have spoken to President

Trump, Chancellor Angela Merkel and

President Macron. We have agreed to

cooperate closely in responding to

this barbaric act and coordinate

efforts to stand for the rules

-based international order which

Russia seeks to undermine. I will

also speak to other allies and

partners in the coming days. I

welcome the strong expressions of

support from Nato and from partners

across the European Union and be on.

Later in New the UN Security Council

will hold open consultations, where

we will be pushing for a

international response. We have also

notified the information Billy Knott

Organisation for the Prohibition of

Chemical Weapons about Russia's use

of this nerve agent and we are

working with the police to enable

the open ECW to independently verify

the analysis. It was not just an act

in Salisbury or an act against the

UK, it is an affront to the

Prohibition of chemical weapons to

the rules -based system on which we

and our national partners depend. We

will work with allies and partners

to confront such actions were ever

they threaten our security at home

and abroad. I commend the statement

to the house.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Thank

you, Mr speaker. I would like to

thank the Prime Minister for the

advance sight of her statement and I

echo her words about the state of

emergency and public services. The

attack in Salisbury was an appalling

act of violence. Nerve agents are

abominable if used in any war, and

it is utterly reckless to use them

in a civilian environment. This

attack in Britain has concerned our

allies in the European Union, Nato

and the UN, and their words of

solidarity have strengthened our

position diplomatically. Our

response as a country must be guided

by the rule of law, support for

international agreements and respect

for human rights. So, when it comes

to the use of chemical weapons on

British soil, it is essential that

the Government works with the United

Nations to strengthen its chemical

weapons monitoring system and

involves the office of the

Prohibition of chemical weapons. The

Prime Minister said on Monday either

this was a direct act by the Russian

states or the Russian government

lost control of their potentially

catastrophically damaging nerve

agent and allow dish to get into the

hands of others. Our response must

be both decisive and proportionate,

and based on clear evidence. If the

Government believes that it is still

a possibility that Russia

negligently lost control of a

military grade nerve agent, what

action is being taken through the

OPCW with our allies? I welcome the

fact that the police are working

with the OPCW... And has the Prime

Minister taken the necessary steps

under the chemical weapons

convention to make a formal request

for evidence from the Russian

government under Article 9.2? How

has she responded to the Russian

government's request for a sample of

the agent used in the Salisbury

attack to run its own tests? Has

high-resolution trace analysis been

run on a sample of the nerve agent?

And has not revealed any evidence as

to the location of its production or

the identity of its perpetrators?

And can the Prime Minister update

the house on what conversations, if

any, she has had with the Russian

government? And, while... And while

suspending planned high-level

contact, does the Prime Minister

agree that it is essential to

maintain a robust dialogue with

Russia? In the interests of our own

and wider international security.

With many countries, Mr Speaker,

speaking out... Speaking out

alongside us, the circumstances

demand that we build an

international consensus to address

the use of chemical weapons. We

should urge our International are

lies to join us and call on Russia

to reveal, without delay, full

details of its chemical weapons

programme to the Organisation for

the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

It is, as we on these benches have

its best before, a matter of huge

regret that there are countries --

that our country's diplomatic

capacity has been stripped back in

the last five years. It is, Mr

Speaker... It is, Mr Speaker...

The

Right Honourable Gentleman must be

heard. There will be adequate

opportunity for colleagues on both

sides of the house to put questions.

Members must be heard. Jeremy

Corbyn.

I couldn't understand a word

of what the Foreign Secretary just

said, Mr Speaker, but his behaviour

demeans his office. It is in moments

such as these that governments

realise how vital strong diplomacy

and political pressure are four hour

security and national interests. The

measures we take have to be

effective, not as for the long-term

security of citizens but to secure a

world free of chemical weapons. So,

can the Prime Minister outline what

discussions she has had with our

partners in the European Union, Nato

and the UN, and what a willingness

there was to take multilateral

action? While the poisonings, Mr

Speaker, of Sergei and Yulia Skripal

are confronting us today, what

efforts are being made to assess the

death of his daughter, who died in

2012, and the deaths of his eldest

brother and son, who had both died

in the past two years? We have a

duty to speak out against the abuse

of human rights by the Putin

government and its supporters, both

at home and abroad. I join many

others in this house in paying

tribute to the many campaigners in

Russia, for human rights and

justice, and democracy in that

country. Mr Speaker, we must do more

to address the dangers posed by the

State's relationship with unofficial

Mafia like groups and corrupt

oligarchs. We must also expose the

flows of ill gotten cash between the

Russian state and billionaires who

becomes stupendously rich by looting

their country and subsequently use

London to protect their wealth. We

welcome the Prime Minister's

statement though, clearly committing

to support the amendments and

commenting out as soon as possible,

as we on this side have long pushed

for. Mr Speaker, yesterday Nikolai

Kirchhoff, a Russian exile who is

close friends with Boris Berezovsky,

was found dead in his home. What

reassurance can she give to citizens

of Russian origin living in Britain

that they are safe here? The events

in Salisbury are abominable and have

been rightly condemned right across

the house. Britain has to build a

consensus with our allies, and we

support the Prime Minister in... Mr

Speaker, we support the Prime

Minister in taking multilateral

action, and firm action, to ensure

that we strengthen the chemical

weapons Convention, to ensure that

this dreadful, appalling act, which

we totally condemn, never happens

again in our country.

Weapon the Right Honourable

Gentleman raised a number of

questions around the nerve agent

that had been used. He asked if we

have put together an international

coalition to call on Russia to

reveal the details of its chemical

weapons programme to the OPCW. That

is indeed what we did. We gave the

Russian government the opportunity,

through the message that was

delivered the Russian ambassador, to

do just that. They have not done so.

He has raised a number of questions.

He asked about the corrupt elites

and money going through London. As I

said in my statement, led by the

National Crime Agency, we will

continue to bring all of the

capabilities of UK law enforcement

to bear against serious criminals

and corrupt elites. There is no

place for these people or their

money in our country. That work is

ongoing. He talked about getting an

international consensus together. As

I have said, I have spoken to

Chancellor Merkel, to President

Trump, President Macron, and others

have expressed their support. The

Nato Secretary General said we stand

in solidarity with our allies in the

United Kingdom and those

responsible, both those who

committed and ordered the crime,

must face appropriately serious

consequences. The Nato Council has

expressed deep concern at the first

offensive use of a nerve agent on

Alliance territory since Nato's

foundation, and allies agreed with a

clear breach international norms and

agreements. Donald Tusk, the

President of the EU Council, said I

express my full solidarity with

Theresa May in the face of a brutal

attack inspired most likely by

Moscow. I am ready to put the issue

next week's European Council. We

will be doing that. I say to The

Right Honourable Gentleman that this

is not a question of our diplomacy,

what diplomatic support we have

around the world. This is a question

of the culpability of the Russian

state for attacks on our soil.

He says that we should be trying to

build a consensus. It is clear from

the conversations we have had with

allies that we have a consensus with

our allies. It was clear from the

remarks that were made by

backbenchers across the whole of the

house on Monday that there is a

consensus across the backbenchers of

this house. I am only sorry that the

consensus does not go as far as the

Right Honourable Gentleman.

Who could have taken the opportunity

as the UK Government has done to

condemn the culpability of the

Russian state.

Mr Kenneth Clarke!

Mr Speaker, it seems to me without

any access to enclosed information

that the choice of this particularly

bizarre and dreadful way of killing

an individual is a deliberate choice

by the Russian Government to put

their signature on a particular

killing so that other defectors are

left in no doubt that it is the

Russian Government that will act if

they are disappointed in any way by

their actions. In light of that, the

only sensible question that the

Leader of the Opposition asked was

what consultation we propose to have

with Nato, the other European

countries, with the American

Government, about positive action

that can be taken to prevent this

continuing defiance of international

law, with the defiance of all the

rules and testing and possession of

chemical weapons. It is not just a

question of expressing anger about

it, but actually a serious threat to

the safety of the Western world,

unless we all do something together

to start getting the Russians to do

something as opposed to simply

ignore us.

My right honourable friend and

learning friend is absolutely right,

and that is why we are not only

talking to allies bilaterally but

there will be a meeting of the Nato

Council tomorrow at which this issue

will be considered, as the president

of the EU Council said, he will be

putting this on the agenda of the

European Union Council meeting at

the end of next week. My right

honourable and learning friend is

absolutely right, that why we

rightly initially focus on the use

of the nerve agent in the UK and its

impact in the UK, this is about the

illegal use of chemical weapons by

the Russian state, and it is about

an illegal programme to develop

those chemical weapons, by the

Russian state. We will leave no

Stone unturned in order to work with

our allies to ensure we respond

appropriately to that.

Thank you, Mr

Speaker. Let me thank the Prime

Minister for her statement. As the

Prime Minister has stated, the

attack on Sergei Skripal and his

daughter was an unlawful use of

force by the Russian state against

the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker,

there has to be a robust response to

the use of terror on our streets. We

must act in a measured way to show

that we will simply not tolerate

this behaviour, and in this regard,

I welcome and associate with those

of us on these benches with the

measures contained in the statement.

On this matter, I commit my party to

working constructively with the

Government. I am sure the House will

join me with extending thanks to the

police and security services who are

working round the clock and the

recent case in Salsbury. Mr Speaker,

it has been warming to see our

closest friends and allies across

Europe expressing solidarity and

support. Our friends globally must

join with us by standing up to this

abuse of state power by Russia. I

look forward to discussions in the

United Nations. The UN must speak

with a clear and unambiguous voice.

Mr Speaker, the fact that we are

expelling the largest number of

undeclared intelligence officers in

over 30 years is welcome and is the

desire to examine what can be done

from a legislative perspective to

defend against hostile state

activity. As someone who has

previously supported the so-called

Magnitsky measures, I am pleased the

Government is taking action in this

area. Let me commend the actions of

another who had the opportunity, I

met with him earlier. Someone who

was at massive risk and stood at the

effects of Russian state power. Mr

Speaker, financial sanctions are

welcome and we must redouble our

efforts against any money-laundering

by those responsible. It must be

clear to the Russian authorities

that we will not tolerate activities

that infringe international law.

Whilst we support the actions of the

PM, we'll get a descriptive nice

carefully and must ensure proper

scrutiny of any proposed

legislation. Our thoughts are with

those are in Russia who have

suffered abuse of state power and

there is no doubt that is what we

are seeing. In doing so, we look

forward to a time when we can engage

positively for a time of peace and

cooperation, but the only response

today must be a robust one towards

the Kremlin and Russia.

CHEERING

Can I...

THEY ALL YELL

Mr Speaker, can I thank the right

honourable gentlemen for not just

the tone of his response but the

comments he has made. Can I reassure

him that any legislative proposals

we bring forward will have scrutiny

in this house? Can thank him for his

constructive offer to work with the

Government on this issue, because it

is a matter that should concern is

across the whole House? And can

reassure him that although I have

made reference to a number of allies

who have spoken in support of the

UK, others have as well, including

Canada and Australia, who have been

very clear a robust response is

appropriate to this? Once again, I

welcome the comments made by the

right honourable gentlemen.

Mr Speaker, may recommend my right

honourable friend for her strong

leadership? In rising to this

challenge as others have shown they

also two in positions of leadership

have risen to the challenge, and I

may be sorry that others in such

positions have fallen well short...

Can I ask her, in the conversation

she is going to have with our

allies, as he is correct to do, she

may raise with the German Government

the issue of the pipeline that they

are engaged in with the Russians,

which will cut revenues from Ukraine

and Eastern Europe and give Russia

and unparalleled ability to bully

those countries in the future? If

Russia is as we now believe a rogue

state, could she please try and

persuade our allies in Europe and

elsewhere not to treat with them and

make them better off.

Well, I thank my right honourable

friend and can I say to him that I

think one of the things we will be

discussing with our allies is how we

can ensure that the robust message

about the act that has taken place

on UK soil is consistently given and

continues to be given by all our

allies? As regards to the pipeline,

this is a matter regularly discussed

at the European Union Council, as my

right honourable friend would I

suspect imagine.

I welcome the Prime Minister's

statement but her conclusion about

the probability of the Russian state

is an immensely serious one. That in

addition to the breaches of

international law and of the use of

chemical weapons, but also the

continued disregard for the rule of

law and for human rights must be met

with unequivocal condemnation.

Hear, hear!

Can I welcome but the managers she

has taken to downgrade the

intelligence capability of the

Russian state, but also in

particular the work I now understand

has started with the United Nations?

It is important to expose Russia and

what they are doing within the

United Nations and to build the

broadest possible support against

them. Can she say that more about

what she is doing that front?

Can I also thank the right

honourable lady for the strength of

the statement she has made. I know

this is representative of many of

her honourable friends on the

backbenches. We are taking this

matter to the UN and my right

honourable friend the Foreign

Secretary has spoken to the UN

Secretary-General that this issue.

It will be part of the open

discussion taking place tomorrow and

that is the start of the process of

looking at this issue. But as I

indicated in response to my right

honourable friend, the member for

Rushcliffe, this is not just about

the incident which has taken place

here in the United Kingdom but it is

about this use of chemical weapons,

this illegal use of chemical weapons

which has taken place. And the role

of the Russian state and the

development of chemical weapons,

contrary to international law.

Mr Speaker, no reasonable person can

possibly doubt that the Russian

Government has behaved with

arrogance and inhumanity and with

contempt, not least in failing to

respond to the Prime Minister's

deadline, which it surely would have

done if it had known it was innocent

of this charge. In welcoming the

Prime Minister's expulsion of 23

diplomats for intelligence agencies,

will I ask her to make it clear that

any retaliation in kind by the

Russian Government will be met by a

further expulsions, possibly

including even the ambassador, who

spends so much time coming to talk

to us in this place, prolonging the

poor state of Anglo Russian

relations? Will she accept that

Russia traditionally respects

strength and despite his weakness,

and that the time has come to

recognise that 2% GDP is not enough

to spend on defence when we are

reverting to the sort of adversarial

relationship, when we used to spend

a much higher proportion of GDP in

ensuring that this country was well

defended?

Can I thank my right honourable

friend for his remarks? As I said in

my statement, in response to his

first point, there are other

measures we stand ready to deploy

any time, should we face further

Russian provocation. On the other

point he made, of course, as we have

been looking through our national

security capability review and our

modernising defence programme

review, what we're is ensuring that

for the variety and diversity of

threats this country faces, we have

the resources and capabilities

available to deal with those

threats. But of course, as those

threats diversify, not all of them

will be responded to buy what is

conventionally normally considered

to be defence.

Can I say that I, and my party,

fully support the Prime Minister's

statement? Can I start by asking

what is her response to the brave

Leader of the Opposition in Russia,

who is not allowed to stand in the

presidential election? Who has said

that the most effective action the

British Government can take is to

use its legal powers, such as the

unexplained wealth orders, against

named individuals who are critical

to the Putin operation? And unions

in particular a person who has

substantial property and sporting

interests and the first Deputy Prime

Minister, who amongst other things

owns a £40 million flat overlooking

the Ministry of Defence? Will she

act?

And I thank the right honourable

gentlemen for the support he has

given to the actions being taken by

the Government. Can I also say to

him, as I did in my statement, that

we do of course look at issues

around corrupt elites and we look at

issues around criminal finance and

we look at using the tools and

capabilities that are at our

disposal, and the National Crime

Agency continues without work?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I thank

the Prime Minister for higher press

of leadership in this matter?

Unusually I side with the leader of

the Liberal Democrats in calling for

more use of Linux by wealth

orders... Can also ask her if she

will use tools at his disposal to

expose the wealth of the Vladimir

Putin family? $300 million or more

has been stolen from the Russian

people buy that man. We should

expose them for what he is and not

be a useful idiot hiding behind

legalism of his crimes.

Can I thank my friend Mike for his

contribution and suggestion? And I

also say on the unexplained wealth

orders, of course, those articles we

do use, but we have to use is

properly in accordance with the rule

of law, following the new processes

that should take place.

Thank you, and I welcome the Prime

Minister's statement, agree with her

analysis and fully support the

Government's actions.

I understand that the Foreign Office

has called for an urgent meeting of

the UN Security Council.

What is the Prime Minister think the

result of this is likely to be,

given that one permanent member of

the council is engaging in unlawful

attacks on another, and does she

share my concerns that Russian

action in this country, in Ukraine,

and in backing Assad's murderous

regime in Syria, means that the

current security Council mechanism

is broken?

Thank you, to her for her comments.

And the Foreign Secretary spoke to

the UN Secretary-General yesterday

and later today in New York, the UN

security council will hold initial

consultations and obviously Russia

is a member of that Security Council

but I think it is important we

continue to use the international

organisations that are available to

us. The United Nations is a

protector of the International rules

-based order and that is what it

should be, we will continue to press

for a robust international response.

It is clear that almost unanimously

across the house there is support

for my right honourable friend's

proportionate and right response to

this crisis. In particular, she is

absolutely right to use the

mechanisms of the United Nations to

make clear to everybody what has

happened in this case. And will she

also bear in mind that in Syria,

Russia has either indirectly or

directly authorised and used

chemical weapons. May I also thank

her for what she has said about the

Magnitsky amendment, which many

others across the house have been

working for for some time now. I

hope she will give consideration for

implementing the full Magnitsky

amendment, as it has been in

fermented in America and Canada.

Panay first of all say, and it picks

up a point made from the previous

question, that this is not some day

one act we see from Russia, it is a

pattern of actions by Russia, where

they are undertaking, in a variety

of ways, different actions. Of

course, what we see them doing in

Syria, the illegal annexation of

Premier, and the use of propaganda,

their attempts to interfere in

elections across the continent of

Europe. -- Crimea. These are all the

actions that the Russian state are

getting involved in. In response to

the second point, we will bring

forward a government amendment to

reflect the Magnitsky considerations

and ensure that we have got the

strongest possible means to deal

with these issues.

We welcome the

decisive action which is being taken

by the Prime Minister today. It sits

in contrast with the policy of

appeasement that we have heard from

the front bench of the Labour Party.

I am sure the people of the United

Kingdom are pleased that it is the

Prime Minister who is standing

behind the dispatch box today,

defending the rule of law and the

citizens of this country. However,

she has told us she has spoken to

our allies over the last couple of

days. Perhaps you could tell us,

apart from words of support, what

actions have they committed to to

ensure that, first of all, a message

is sent out about this action and

actions in the future?

Can I thank

the honourable gentleman for his

remarks and the support of the DUP

for the action of the Government is

taking on this matter? Can I say to

them, in relation to the action

taken by international allies, they

were waiting to announce the actions

we were taking, the decision taken

by the National Security Council

this morning, but we will be holding

further discussions with allies

about the way in which they can

support what we're doing with

actions themselves.

I entirely agree

with the approach adopted by my

right honourable friend the Prime

Minister in how she has responded to

this outrageous attack. Does she

agree with me that the difficulty we

face is not so much in getting the

concurrence of our allies in

agreeing on the nature of the

outrage, but how we are going to

craft a sustained strategy so that

those of us who believe in the rules

-based international system you can

apply the necessary leverage and

persuasion on Russia to conform to

it? And the very serious risk that

we run is that if we do not succeed

in doing this, the level of violence

that Russia is guide to exercise

with impunity against other states

and us will simply increase? And

that this is something that our

allies in particular must have

regard to if we are going to make

any progress?

My right honourable

and learned friend is absolutely

correct that this is an issue that

we need to address in that wider

sense, because it is about the way

in which the Russian state is

acting, it believes, with impunity,

in a whole variety of ways, the way

in which it is flouting

international rules -based order. We

must come together as allies to

ensure that we are supporting that

international rules -based order and

that we have not just a collective

agreement, but a collective approach

that ensures that we can challenge

what Russia is doing. But he's also

right, one of the points I think we

should be making to our allies is

that this may have happened in the

United Kingdom, but, actually, it is

something that could be happening

any of these states.

I join others

in welcoming the measure is the

Prime Minister has announced today.

As Russia has chosen to act against

us in such an outrageous way, we

have to demonstrate our

determination to defend ourselves.

Given that Russia's usual response

is to deny all responsibility for

such actions, as well as seeking the

assistance of the Organisation for

the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

in identifying the sample, does she

intend, as any member state is

entitled to do, to ask for that

organisation to carry out an

investigation, including an

inspection of any facilities or

locations in Russia where this nerve

agent in all probability was

produced?

Can I say to the Right

Honourable Gentleman that we will be

talking to the OPCW about a number

of ways in which not just the sample

of the nerve agent used here in the

United Kingdom can be independently

verified, but other actions that the

OPCW might be able to take?

May I

welcome the decision of the

Government to refer the patiently

and carefully acquired evidence in

this attack to the Organisation for

the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons?

Is it her intention that the

findings should be transferred to

the Russians, the United Nations and

to ourselves, and will she consider,

in light of that finding, going

further on unexplained wealth orders

and other financial sanctions

against Russia if necessary?

I say

to my right honourable friend that,

of course, we are asking the OPCW to

independently verify this, so that

it can be clear to everyone the

nature of this nerve agent. Can I

also say to him that, as I said

earlier in response to the

unexplained wealth orders, these are

things which we do operate, we do

use and we have introduced. We will

always ensure that they are done on

evidence and, obviously, we operate

according to the rule of law.

Can I

welcome the Prime Minister's clear

statement and her condemnation of

the Russians, and the action she has

taken? Can I in particular welcome

the fact that she is adopting the

Magnitsky Amendment from the

Government? Can I say that too much

money is being Lord and -- laundered

and finding its way to the British

system? There are two magazines she

could do pretty quickly to tackle

that. In the first place, she could

bring forward a public register of

ownership of properties, promised by

her predecessor in 2015 and has been

delayed by this government. In the

second place, she could increase

transparency in our corporate

structures, so that we will know who

forms companies, where the money

comes from, and deal with it if it

is illicit money that is brought in

by unsavoury people?

In relation to

the issue she has raised about the

transparency, in relation to

property ownership, that is

something I have discussed with the

Business Secretary. We haven't been

delaying that. We need to make sure

we get that right. We have been

discussing the timing for

introducing that. We do want sure we

have all the tools in our locker we

can use that can help us in the

endeavour that we are engaged in.

I

want to 100% support the premise was

a statement and the actions she is

taking. To follow up on the last

question, I wanted to pick up on the

statement that there is no place for

serious criminals and corrupt elites

or their money in our country. There

are amendments that the premise will

support. It will she bear in mind

that the select committees need to

know what is going on to tackle

dirty money in the City of London or

elsewhere, to bring evidence to the

house, to shake the action that the

Government can then take?

I thank my

right arm will friend for her

suggestion. Indeed, I recognise the

role that select committees can

play. I suspect my right honourable

friend has just set up a stream of

work for her own Treasury Select

Committee to undertake.

Can I ensure

the Prime Minister that most of us

on these benches fully support the

measures she has announced today.

Indeed, some of us think they could

have come a bit sooner. On the wider

issue of Putin's hybrid warfare

against our country, will she Tasker

the intelligence services to

investigate his influencing

operations in our institutions and

political parties?

The Right

Honourable Gentleman raises an

important issue about the propaganda

activities that are being undertaken

and I will look at his suggestions.

We should all be thanking God today

it is my right honourable friend at

her place and not the so-called

alternative. I am not expecting my

right honourable friend to comment

on the detail, but this morning,

residents in my constituency saw the

Metropolitan Police and the army in

place, the stricken lockdown,

removing vehicles and items linked

to the Salisbury incident. I am not

expecting my right honourable friend

to give over information on current

operations, but Coogee content two

things? First, that she, the

government and the security services

are doing all that they can to my

constituents safe, and can she

arrange fulsomely to provide

everything to me, as the member of

Parliament, as to precisely what

happened?

Can I say to my right

honourable friend I am very happy to

do that. As he will be aware, the

police investigation does continue.

We cannot say where the

investigation is going to take the

police in terms of their further

inquiries. I was sure that she is

provided with a briefing as a member

of Parliament.

I completely support

everything the Prime Minister has

said today. The truth is, under

Putin, the Russian Federation has

managed to combine all of the worst

facets of communism and all of the

worst assets of rampant capitalism,

all wrapped up inside a national

security state which keeps its

people poor and kills his political

opponents. Can I just ask about the

Russian ambassador? Since he arrived

here seven years ago, he has

repeatedly lied to parliamentarians.

He has tried to get the speaker to

stop debates on Russia happening in

this house. He has tried to

interfere in the internal elections

of this house. Surely to God, it is

time we now told him that we will

order our affairs in this country,

not him, and he can go home.

Welcome

I say to the Right Honourable

Gentleman he is absolutely right, we

will order our affairs in this

country and we will not be told what

to do by Russian ambassadors. I

fully expect the house authorities

to ensure it is not possible for an

external parties such as that to

interfere in elections in this

house. Can I also say that it is a

brave man who tries to tell the

Speaker of the House of Commons what

to do when anything down.

For the

avoidance of doubt, he got nowhere

with me, you be sure about that.

Anna Soubry?

Is to Speaker, it is

noticeable that the length and

breadth of this place has completely

supported not just the wise words

and leadership of the Prime

Minister, but also her firm actions,

with the notable exception of the

front bench of the opposition. That

is a shameful moment. Further to the

question asked by the Honourable

Member for Exeter, democracy is a

fundamental British value. And there

have been long held concerns that

Russia has been seeking to undermine

and interfere in it. If those

concerns now turn to evidence, will

she take equally robust action

against Russia to ensure that our

great British democracy continues to

be protected?

I am very happy to give the

assurance to my right honourable

friend of the action that we take.

We recognise that the first duty of

government is to safeguard the

nation and we treat the security and

integrity of our democratic

processes, as with everything else

in this country, very seriously. In

terms of disinformation that is used

by the Kremlin, we know that they

persistently use this to destabilise

perceived enemies, and managing this

is a long-term priority for the UK.

We continue to work not just as the

UK, but with international partners

on efforts to counter this.

Alongside many colleagues in this

house, I speak and a half of my

party in calling for a robust and

immediate response. Sources inform

us that Russia is the UK's biggest

wrappings grade nuclear substances

export market. This is despite

several attempts at a moratorium on

depleted uranium by the European

Parliament and the United Nations.

Will the Prime Minister confirm

whether the UK still exports nuclear

substances to Russia, and, if so,

surely this should be among the very

first sanctions imposed?

Can I thank

the honourable lady for the remarks

that she has made for the support

she has given from her party for the

actions that the government is

taking. What we have been talking

about today is the use of a nerve

agent, they chemical weapon UK soil,

and the blatant flouting of the

International rules -based order,

and the legal structure around that

use of chemical weapons by the

Russian state.

When I served as Security Minister

and my right honourable friend was

Home Secretary, I became aware of

both of her outstanding

determination and dedication, and

they commitment of expertise to

security services and

counterterrorism. She knows as the

House knows that this is important.

But this invent happened in

Salisbury and could have happened in

rapture or a Lincolnshire... Will

she asked the Home Secretary to look

at whether our local woollies forces

are equipped, given the dynamic --

whether our local police forces are

quotes given the dynamic nature of

these events, to deal with these

events?

He has a particular understanding of

these issues, but can I say to him

that the ability to bring in

capabilities of the counterterrorism

police, who don't just operate in

the Metropolitan Police, as he

knows, but have regional bases

around the country as well, is part

of the layover structure we have in

relation to police forces, but I am

sure my right honourable friend will

make sure that the police look at

the immediate response that they

have to this incident, to ensure we

will not see an incident of this

type happening again on UK soil, and

that is why we are giving a clear

message to the Russian state that we

do want to ensure all of our police

forces are aware of threats they may

face.

The Prime Minister's words were

appropriate, measured and correct,

and she has my full support. She

mentions dirty money from Russia.

Can she look again at the role of

the tax Havens internationally,

including those in British Overseas

Territories and Crown dependencies?

I thank the honourable gentleman for

his remarks. Can I say to him that,

as he knows, we have been taking a

number of measures in relation to

financial activities in the British

Overseas Territories and

dependencies, and we continued to

press and those? And of course we

have enhanced our ability to deal

with these issues here in relation

to economic crime through the

formation of the National economic

crime Centre, which I am pleased to

say, obviously having fun the

National Crime Agency, we have now

set up that national economic crime

Centre as part of the NCA which

brings capabilities together to do

with these issues?

My constituents will be reassured by

the way you are regarding the

nation's security. Can I ask my

honourable friend to contempt the

remarks of President Putin who are

tacked nations for meddling in the

United States of America? Can I ask

about possible drug use of chemical

weapons... What is the prospect of

such chemical weapons had ending up

in the hands of extremists?

I must say that I also condemned the

remarks he has referred to that were

made in relation to certain

communities in the United States.

Can I say to my honourable friend in

relation to the second part of his

question, that what we're talking

about here is a nerve agent that was

developed as part of eight chemical

weapons programme by the Russian

state? I think that will give him a

clear message in relation to this.

Could I fully support what the Prime

Minister said in her statement in

the actions she outlined today? Can

ask the Prime Minister about my

concerns about whether we have in

place a proper strategy to combat

chemical weapons attacks on this

country, particular small-scale

attacks? At the premiership me

reassurance to tell me if work is

continuing to improve that? -- could

the Prime Minister give me

reassurance?

We look at this issue and have a

strategy but will of course ensure,

given what has happened, we will

review of and look again to make

sure we have the best possible

opportunity to ensure that this

cannot happen again.

Whilst welcoming the Prime

Minister's statement as almost

everyone else has, can I join with

the Right honourable member for

Beaconsfield about the important for

the international rule of law? I say

this is an important public decision

for China to decide which side she

is going to sit on in this

arrangement? Can I urge my right

honourable friend to make sure we

make the most energetic steps to

ensure that China stands with the

rest of the civilised world on the

site of law and responsibility.

Thank you for raising the issue in

this way. We want to see the maximum

possible adherence to the

international rules -based order

across the whole world. In a

different context this is a matter

that I raised when I was in China

recently.

This is an extremely important

parliamentary occasion and I think

it's understandable that very large

numbers of members would want to

question the Prime Minister. Can I

request you colleagues that they

should seek to ensure that their

questions are as succinct as the

Prime Minister's replies have been,

and that way we might get through a

very great many more quickly than

otherwise?

I also support the measure the Prime

Minister announced and condemnation

to what is increasingly looking like

a rogue state. On the question of

the integrity of the UN Security

Council, we must now begin to talk

about reform. Russia cannot be

allowed to simply sit pretty,

thumbing its nose at the rest of the

world community, and building itself

immune from the rule of law

internationally. Will she initiate

that sort of reform discussion with

the general secretary?

And once again thank the right

honourable gentlemen for the remarks

made today and support given to the

Government, as he did so on Monday?

In relation to the question, we

talked to the United Nations about

reform of the UN in a whole variety

of ways. In a decision made at the

catch 22 is that any decision taken

in the Security Council to reform it

of course could be subject to a veto

by Russia, who are sitting there

are... I think the point has been

raised not just by the right

honourable gentlemen but by others

and this is something we must look

at.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister has

underlined to the house at the

Russian state has either been

utterly reckless at best or directly

complicit at worst, in contravening

the movement against employing a

harmful substance on our soil. Will

she take a hardline defences against

hostile State defence? Will she

ensure appropriate balances be

employed against counterterrorism

and counterespionage to ensure our

excellent security and intelligence

agencies are appropriately focused

too, and rightly disrupt those who

would cause harm in our country?

Can I say to my right honourable

friend, also a former Security

Minister who has an understanding of

these issues, that I take the point

he has made, we do indeed constantly

ensure that the balance is right

between counterterrorism and

counterespionage, and we will

continue to ensure that balance is

maintained properly?

Responding with strength and resolve

when your country is under threat is

an essential component of political

leadership. There is a Labour

tradition that understands that, and

it has been understood by prime

ministers of all parties who have

stood at that despatch box. That

means when chemical weapons are

used, we need more than words but

deeds. And can I ask the premise to

what more she can do to enhance our

solidarity with our allies,

particularly at a time when there

are a Nationalist forces trying to

drive wedges between democratic

countries, some of those forces

backed and supported by the Russians

themselves?

Can I first of all say to the right

honourable gentleman that he is of

course absolutely right that there

is a strong tradition in the Labour

Party of recognising the importance

of acting in the national interest

and acting in our national

security's interest when under

threat? And we have seen that from

governments of all complexions over

the years. In relation to the point

about the international activity and

the deeds that we need to take, it

is right and we will be continuing

to talk and we have been speaking to

our allies even before this event

took place about the ways in which

we could deal with and address some

of the activities and actions Russia

has been taking across the countries

in Europe and elsewhere. But we will

redouble those efforts.

Does my right honourable friend

agree that some of the best assets

we have against Russian

disinformation propaganda is the BBC

World Service? Will she look at ways

in which we can extend the reach of

the World Service, perhaps by

incorporating world television?

Dishy agree we need to be careful

not to give any pretext, however

unjustified, for the Russians to

take action against BBC and other

free media outlets? -- does

agree?

I would hope that the Russian state

would be prepared to accept the

importance of free media but sadly

one or two things we heard last

night suggest this may not be the

case. My right honourable friend is

right that the broadcasting of the

BBC, of the World Service, is an

important element of the reach that

the United Kingdom has but it is

important as a part of people who

believe in democracy and the rule of

law and free speech and expression

to have an outlet and she is doing

just that.

Mr Speaker, I was glad to hear the

Prime Minister mentioned the

sanctions and the anti-money

laundering bill and I welcome the

commitment to the Magnitsky

Amendment. But you will understand

that many uptake SLPs and LLPs are

engaged in money-laundering from

Russia via Azerbaijan, Georgia, the

Ukraine through these country. Was

he Speaker Cabinet colleagues and

bring forward sanctions under the

anti-money-laundering bill to tackle

these corrupt elites, because money

is happening -- money-laundering is

happening via capital has at the

moment.

We have been working with the

financial sector on ways we can

improve the action we are taking

against money-laundering, and this

is one of the things I expect the

National economic crime Centre to

look at closely.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I welcome

the action of my right honourable

friend as she announced today. One

way Russia seeks to extend influence

in Europe is building relationships

of energy dependence. Is my right

honourable friend aware that we have

recently begun to receive Russian

natural gas? We need to bring in

extra energy resources from Qatar,

Malaysia and Australia who are more

than willing to sell to us, allies?

When looking to gas supplies, we are

looking to other countries and I

confirm this.

Can I say I am another one who

supports the statement she has made

today? As a strong advocate for the

defence and security of our country.

Mechanic draw attention to something

I don't want to get lost in what she

said, while our response must be

robust, it must also remain true to

our values, and as such, with the

prime ministers say a bit about

something I think she has done,

which is not disabled band Russia

today, which actually I think is a

strong point to make -- it is not to

say we will ban Russia Today. We

Also Believe in the rule of law and

democracy.

We believe in the rule of law and

democracy and free media.

The question of the status of Russia

Today A a broadcasting in the United

Kingdom is not a matter for the

Government but a matter for the

independent Ofcom to consider.

The premise that was correct to say

that our argument is not the Russian

people but with the Russian state

which has sponsored murder on our

streets. Today we have heard

absolute solidarity from across the

western world and was political

parties, but what chairman of

support has my right honourable

friend received from the one

political party which gives

unequivocal 100% backing to the

Leader of the Opposition, the

commonest party of Great Britain? --

the Communist Party of Great

Britain.

It believe I have received any such

statement from the Communist Party

of Great Britain although I did

notice that a matter of one or two

weeks ago they did say that they

were not going to be standing as

candidates against where the Labour

Party were standing and they now

felt more comfortable in working

with the Labour Party.

I strongly work on the Prime

Minister's statement but I urge her

to go further in using energy policy

as a new way of attacking the

Russian threat. While there were

significant British energy interests

in Russia, will acknowledge that...

Anti-development in the military and

intelligence assets are primarily

funded by the sale of Russian fossil

fuels. Callander for comment at

looking -- can I comment to look the

EU energy strategy largely written

in Russia and reducing dependency on

fossil fuels?

I understand this about the extent

to which Russia uses its energy as a

means to influence and have an

impact on those countries that are

in receipt of it and also the

finances it provides from what is an

important one, and I can assure him

that as we continue to discuss with

the European Union not just our

energy security but that wider

energy security that Mac

many

members of this and the other House

are members of multilateral

parliamentary organisations.

Like the Council of Europe and the

Nato parliamentary assembly... Would

my right honourable friend agree

that a way we can help get behind

her leadership and the Government

position on this is to when we

attend events get the message across

to explain the policies of this

Government, to explain what is

happening and why our allies should

be supporting us?

I think he has raised an extremely

valuable point and I welcome that

suggestion and would encourage him

and other members of this house in

the multilateral organisations to do

just that.

The Prime Minister will

know I do not shy away from

criticising international policies

when they get it wrong. She should

know that she has my full and

unequivocal support for the measure

she has set out, particularly in

light of the revelations coming out

of the Robert Mueller inquiry, will

she insurers that she will leave no

stone unturned when examining the

Russian State's attempts to subvert

parliamentary democracy whether by

financial, propaganda, and other

means, however uncomfortable some of

those findings may be for us?

I am

very happy to give that commitment

and thank you for the Commons he has

made today. I know that he is not

backward in coming forwards when he

wishes to criticise the Government,

but he has given support to the

government not just today but on

Monday as well. I welcome that and

thank him for it.

I also welcome my

right honourable friend's clear,

decisive actions she is taking. Can

she reassure the British citizens

that are looking to travel to Russia

over the coming weeks and months

that regular updates will be

provided by the Commonwealth office

and their safety will be paramount?

I can give that assurance to my

honourable friend. I suggest to

those that do wish to travel to

Russia that they do ensure they are

checking the Foreign Office advice.

My understanding is that the travel

advice has not changed at this

stage. But people should check that

travel advice before they move.

This

is a day for the house to speak as

one for the nation. She will be

reassured to hear that a clear

majority of Labour MPs, alongside

the leaders of every other party,

support the firm stance she has

taken. Can I ask, is she prepared

that this situation will probably

get more difficult before it gets

better? And is she prepared to stay

the course, to face down this

international bully and wrecker of

the rule of all across the world?

Can I thank the honourable gentleman

for the remarks he has made, and he

made a strong statement on Monday as

well. Can I assure him that I am

this government will stay the

course. We recognise that there may

be further Russian provocation. If

there is, we have further measures

we can deploy in relation to that.

But I think it is important that we,

and we will encourage international

allies to do this as well, that we

recognise this is an important

moment to stand up and say to

Russia, no, you cannot do this. The

Russian economy is a fraction, but

their expenditure on offensive

capability is a multiple of hours.

Is there a lesson there?

Well, can I

say to my right honourable friend

that, of course, we do constantly

look at the resources that we are

putting in to ensure our national

security, which is assured across a

number of apartments in Government,

and we continue to do so.

Can I

welcome the Prime Minister's a

response, which she set out today?

Further to the confirmation that no

minister member of the Royal family

will be attending the World Cup this

summer, does she believe this should

also extend to senior FA officials,

and will she ask Nato allies to join

us in this endeavour?

I think the

attendance at sporting events is a

matter for these sporting

authorities. It is a matter for

them. They will be aware of the

statement I have made today. They

will be aware that we say that no

ministers and members of the Royal

family will be attending the World

Cup, and I am sure they will want to

be considering their position.

As

chair of the Interparliamentary

Union, I led a delegation to St

Petersburg and was met by Russian

people with great warmth and

hospitality. Will she stress that

our problem is not with them, it is

with their appalling leadership, and

the Russian ambassador has made it

clear that we should expect

retaliation, so will she send a

clear signal to him and Moscow that

the United Kingdom will not be

threatened?

I am grateful to him for

the remarks that he has made. I

think last night I saw the Russian

ambassador being quoted as saying

that Russia was not a country that

accepted ultimatums. Well, I can say

to my right honourable friend and

others that the United Kingdom is

not a country that accepts threats

and we will stand against them.

I

welcome the Prime Minister's

reminder that we have no problem

whatsoever with the peoples of the

Russian Federation, who are, after

all, living under Putin's

dictatorship all the time. The

action that has to be taken against

Putin will make it more difficult

for the organisations that seek to

keep good relations with the people

of the Russian Federation. Is there

anything that the government can do

that can help them continue the good

work, even as we impose strict

sanctions against their leader?

What

is important, in my statement, and

this is the point my right

honourable friend made in his

previous question, that we are very

clear that we have no argument with

the Russian people. It is with the

Russian state, the Russian

government and their actions that we

are concerned. I think in the

response that we give, it is

important that we make that clear,

not just in words, but in actions.

That is why what I have talked about

today is a response that affects the

Russian state and the Russian

government, and not the Russian

people.

With regards to the longer term,

given the actions of the Russian

state under President Putin, hasn't

the time now come to have a

fundamental reassessment of our

defence spending, in collaboration,

preferably, with our allies, but

alone if not?

I say to my honourable

friend, as he will know, we are one

of the limited number of countries

within Nato that maintains our

commitment to spending 2% of our GDP

on defence. We do have, as I am sure

he is aware, the modernising defence

programme that is being undertaken

at the moment, alongside the

national security capability review.

It is important that we are able to

deal with a variety of threats that

we face. But I would say to my

honourable friend, as I have to

other members of this house, that in

looking at how we deal with those

threats, not all of them will be

dealt with in a way that would

conventionally be considered as a

matter for the Ministry of Defence.

The Prime Minister has rightly said

that the attacks in Britain have

been part of an ongoing, contempt of

Britain, the rule of law and values.

There has also been a contempt of

our alliances, political and

military. In moving forward, will

the Prime Minister work with those

political and military alliances so

that, together, we have a root and

branch removal of Russian

interference in our political,

higher education and financial

institutions? Let this be a marker.

No more, now they will fear what we

will do to hit back on the

interference they have shown us?

I

thank the Honourable Member for the

commitment she has shown us a

parliamentarian to the alliance we

have through Nato, which is very

important and the bedrock of

European defence. I will certainly

say that we will continue to work

through those alliances to ensure we

are sending a very clear message

that is not acceptable.

Thank you,

Mr Speaker. Can I commend the Prime

Minister on her decisive and

vigorous action in response to what

was, after all, an attack on the

United Kingdom? In some ways it had

flashes of the iron lady about it.

But it was also in stark contrast to

the attitude of the Leader of the

Opposition, who simply could not

bring himself to condemn Russia for

this outrageous act. He simply

couldn't do it. Is that not because

he remains, at heart, what he has

always been, a CND badge wearing

apologist for the Russian state?

Can

I say to my honourable friend that I

think people will take their own

conclusions from what they have

heard today. I can also say to my

honourable friend but I am sure he,

as I do, take great reassurance from

the positive messages of support

that have come from the Labour

backbenchers.

Our way of life in

this country, and in the West, is

based on democracy, human rights and

the rule of law. It should be

defended.

Strongly held opinions have been

expressed, everybody can consult the

record. I understand that there is

an intensity of feeling. The

honourable gentleman for such field

must have his question heard, then

the answer will be heard.

Our way of

life in this country, and in the

West, is based on human rights,

democracy and the rules of law. It

should be defended. That is why the

Prime Minister is right to bring

forward sanctions against the state,

a state that does not believe in

those principles. Could the Prime

Minister give a commitment to come

back to the house, she feels the

need for further consideration of

sanctions should be made?

The

honourable gentleman has raised an

important point. I said in my

statement that we had further

measures that we might wish to

deploy if we were subjected to

further Russian provocation. If we

choose to do so, I will come back to

this house.

We will leave the House

of Commons. The announcement from

the Prime Minister

Rights and the rule of law. Will my

right arm or friend ensure that we

can expel Russia from the Council of

Europe as reprisal? It's continuing

membership seems to fly in the face

of our commitment to those important

values?

My right honourable friend

has raised an important point. Can I

submit say that I do not think it is

hands only of the United Kingdom to

expel Russia from the Council of

Europe, but as he would have heard,

our item or friend the member of

Newbury has made the point that

members of the house who are members

of such multilateral groupings

should come I think, be making every

effort to make a point about the

illegitimate activity that has been

undertaken by Russia.

I welcome very

much the Prime Minister's statement

today, the measures she has

announced, which will only be

strengthened if our allies take

similar action. Can she say more

about Nato, and whether she will be

bringing together Nato heads of

state and Government to discuss a

coordinated response?

As I think I

have said earlier in response, the

Nato Council will be meeting

tomorrow to discuss this particular

issue. I will be talking to a number

of allies that are within Nato about

coordination of the response. As I

said earlier, in response to a

previous question, they have been

waiting to hear the details of the

response, which I brought first to

Parliament.

The Prime Minister is

clearly aware that the Kremlin is

using a very full spectrum of tools

in what it considers to be its new

generation warfare against the West.

Assassination is one element of

that. Is the Prime Minister aware of

the important work that was done in

the 70s and 80s by the Senate

intelligence committee in the United

States to methodically exposed

Russian espionage and

disinformation. In that era it was

called active measures. Will she

consider something similar for this