18/03/2018 The Andrew Marr Show

Good morning.

As we shiver our way

through more Siberian weather,

this weekend our relationship

with Russia is going

through a truly dangerous crisis.

It isn't just the alleged

assassinations - it's also

about the strength of our alliances,

Britain's standing in the world.

Or, to put it bluntly, in 2018,

do the Russians care

how angry Britain gets?

Boris Johnson, the Foreign

Secretary, is with us to talk

about the Russian crisis,

and just possibly, one or two other

issues of the moment.

And I've been talking to one

of the most senior Russian

diplomats, Vladimir Putin's

ambassador to the EU,

Vladimir Chizhov.

And in a week when Labour has been

sharply divided about its response

to the Salisbury attack,

Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow

Attorney General,

Baroness Shami Chakrabarti.

So a very busy hour ahead.

Before we get stuck into those

conversations however,

reviewing the news this weekend,

Guardian columnist Owen Jones

and Jane Moore from The Sun.

But first the news

with Christian Fraser.

Good morning.

The Russian Ambassador

to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov,

has suggested that the UK's

own research laboratory in Wiltshire

could be the source of the nerve

agent used in the poisoning

of a former Russian

spy in Salisbury.

Here's our Diplomatic

Correspondent, James Robbins.

Two weeks after the chemical attack

on Sergei and Yulia Skripal,

Ambassador Chizhov said

there were no stockpiles whatsoever

of nerve agents left in Russia.

But then in an interview with

Andrew Marr he went a bit further.

Asked how the chemical weapon came

to be used in Salisbury,

Mr Chizhov suggested...

When you have the nerve agent

or whatever, you check it

against certain samples that

you retain in your laboratories.

And Porton Down, as we now all know,

is the largest military facility

in the United Kingdom that has been

dealing with chemical

weapons research.

And it's actually only eight

miles from Salisbury.

You're not suggesting Porton Down

is responsible for this nerve agent?

I don't know, I don't know,

I don't have evidence

of anything having been used.

As Britain continues to investigate

the chemical attack,

the Foreign Office dismissed this

latest Russian account

as absolute nonsense with not

an ounce of truth in it.

A spokesperson said it's just

another futile attempt

by the Russian state to divert

the story away from the facts that

Russia has acted in flagrant breach

of its international obligations.

James Robbins, BBC News.

And you can see the full interview

with Tadini Chizhov later in this

programme.

The Foreign Secretary has

described Russia's closure

of the British Council and Consulate

in St Petersburg as "futile".

Writing in the Sun on Sunday,

Boris Johnson says the move

will punish ordinary Russians

by depriving them of

opportunities to learn English.

The closures were part

of Russia's retaliation

to sanctions imposed by the UK.

And voting in Russia's

presidential election is taking

place across the country,

with Vladimir Putin set to secure

a fourth term in ofifce.

Mr Putin,

who voted this morning in Moscow,

has run the country as President

or Prime Minister since 1999.

Seven candidates are standing

against him, but polls

place his nearest rival on just 7

per cent of the vote.

Results are expected this evening.

Snow and ice are causing difficult

conditions in parts of the UK

after a new cold snap dubbed

the "mini beast from the east".

Parts of eastern

England and Scotland

have already had snow,

with more expected in

the Midlands and Wales.

Amber warnings have been issued

for north-west England,

Yorkshire, the Midlands,

London and south-east

England from the afternoon.

People are being advised to avoid

travelling unless they have to.

A group of MPs says the government

should consider delaying the date

for leaving the EU if complex

issues remain unresolved.

The Commons Exiting the EU Committee

also suggests the transition period

should be extended if no agreement

is reached by October.

However, eight pro-Brexit MPs

on the committee refused

to back the report.

That's all from me.

The next news on BBC One

is at One o'clock.

Back to you, Andrew.

Thank you Christian.

The front pages, one story

dominating, the Mail on Sunday, the

Prime Minister's war on Vladimir

Hooton. And a similar story on the

Sunday express. This is the Sunday

Telegraph. What Will Puddy near

Putin do? The Sunday Times has

rather an alarming story. Will talk

about that later. -- what will

Vladimir Putin do? And this is the

Observer. Focusing on Cambridge

Analytica. Apparently harvesting

data, preaching rules on Facebook

and what we will do our best to

explain that to you during the

course of the review. At first, the

Sunday Times. Jane.

This is complex

stuff, but what are cooler

conversation I have been hearing all

week has been about Russia cutting

off our gas and here we have the

Sunday Times blackout threat, saying

the National Grid was put on alert

last week by spy chiefs saying this

may happen and we have to prepare

for it. Which is alarming stuff in

terms of this...

And it shows the

danger of the tit-for-tat

escalation, we kick at 23, they kick

out 23 and get rid of the British

Council.

Whether or not this happens

again, in terms of if there is

anything we learn from this ever

evolving story is more money into

defence, hopefully, but hopefully

into energy policies so we are not

over an oil barrel or whatever!

Absolutely. This is not because we

get lots and lots of gas from Russia

but Kos Russian cyber attacks to

close down big chunks of

infrastructure. Owen Jones.

A

fascinating story about Russian

oligarchs in London explaining about

their business is remaining in

Russia, not permanently residing in

the UK, mansions and palaces on by

offshore companies, hailing little

in tax, very parasitical, not

contributing to the economy. It is

the observer, my sister paper, I

apologise!

Absolutely. Anyone who

has bid on watching the Mafia

understands the danger of dirty

money washing to London but the

question is what can be done.

Absolutely, but the Conservatives

have been doing is talking rhetoric

which is light years away in

substance but the

substance but the so-called ten back

to amendment. What Labour aren't

suggesting is to have an oligarchy

levy which would raise about £1

billion every single year of which

would target mansions bought by

offshore trusts which are all over

London. I think the point I am

making, if we want an effect of

response because these are oligarchs

linked to a gangster receive in

Russia, they looted the assets of

that country, they need to get them

where it hurts and it's not doing a

theatrical kick out a diplomat here,

very good for the Russian elections,

shall we have a sweepstake on the

elections? What would get the

Russian regime is to go for the

economic centres and I have a say,

it's interesting you get these

conspiracy theories about the Labour

leadership linked to foreign powers,

they are actually demanding far

tougher action on Russia and its

oligarchs by going for economic

assets than the Tories are and they

will be the Tories are awash with...

Should we be going for economic

assets based on the fact we are in

this argument with Russia or should

we be rolling it out for all dirty

money? It's not just Russian sat at

dirty money going through London.

Both, it's the right thing to do, we

should be pretty ashamed of our

great capital city, at the epicentre

so much money-laundering for many

dubious regimes, these people are

not living here because they like

the weather or the West End, they

come here because we have a regime

that encourages that sort of money

and the Tories I'm afraid are

linked...

It was happening under

Tony Blair as well, a lot of dirty

money.

I don't think anyone could

compare this Labour Party to that

Labour Party.

Let's move on, Boris

Johnson on the show...

He is written

in the Sun on Sunday,

unsurprisingly, he is paid tribute

to the many Labour MPs who have

condemned Vladimir Putin, he kicked

out Jeremy Corbyn unsurprisingly as

the only person who refuses to join

the show of solidarity and have

disappointed... Who is defending

Jeremy Corbyn. I know, Peter

Hitchens no less, coming out for

Jeremy Corbyn and saying Jeremy

Corbyn, the treatment by many

politicians and those in the media

is disgraceful because he's doing

what he's paid to do, which is to

lead the opposition. A powerfully

written piece. He says he has a

better record on foreign policy than

almost anyone in Parliament.

Which

is true, on Libya, he was one of

only 30 MPs that voted against it,

anyone who spoke out was condemned

as a Gaddafi stooge but I think the

pointy mixes imported, look at

Russia, what does the regime do

phone talks about opposition,

foreign links, foreign students,

linked to international terrorists.

They depend on a kind of paranoia.

Increasingly what you have in this

country, the enemies of the people

splashed on the front pages of

newspapers, crushed the saboteurs,

the Leader of the Opposition smeared

as a terrorist and the stooge of

foreign regimes is to delegitimise

the opposition in a way that the

likes of Vladimir Putin doors.

The

likes of Vladimir Putin should them

in the streets.

The culture of

treating your opponents as traitors

is dangerous and all like-minded

people...

He points out that he does

not like him sucking up to Sinn

Fein.

Ruth Davidson the Conservative

has broken ranks are spawning and

suggested I think the Sunday

Telegraph that we should close down

Russian today because it's a

propaganda mouthpiece.

I think it's

obviously a propaganda station,

closing it down would be a PR gift I

think for the Russian regime, they

are clamping down on our press.

If

we know it's a propaganda station

that sort of actually takes away its

power.

Exactly. I think the real

question is to put to the Tories if

they want to take action is will you

stop taking Russian link money,

another question, Theresa May kibosh

to an inquiry into the poisoning of

Alexander opinion good many years

ago because she said at a upset

diplomatic relations with Russia,

why?

Marine A lit Binion go his

widow was on the show last week,

very, very upset, to care a long

time to get the public inquiry and

she thought the statement was not

tough enough.

You would think maybe,

you probably too many James Bond

movies but the upside of being a spy

is that you drive around in an Aston

Martin and live in a large house

with the spoils of your work but we

know from what we read that a lot of

these guys live in relative

anonymity in a terraced house and

there is this guy, a Russian

defector, saying he lives in fear of

his life, a KGB defector, halls in

his shoes, living in complete

poverty, and the reporter David

Collins says he's been abandoned by

Britain. And you do wonder, that

sort of part of the problem, isn't

it? These guys are abominable to

attack because we had just said,

thanks very much for what you did,

get on with your life with no

security, money, nothing.

You could

argue from the point of view of

Vladimir Putin he has everything he

wants, a crisis ahead of the

election to maximise turnout, at the

same time he is sending the message

he wants to send to all former KGB

or FSB defectors, you will be

killed.

My fear of the diplomatic

ratcheting, it does not cause any

harm to the regime, it is good

propaganda, that is why the economic

assets or more powerful.

Mexican or

powerful in his own country.

My

friends, the time has come, to try

and explain the Cambridge Analytica

story.

Over to you. This is quite

interesting, the harvesting of data

and doing detailed data profiling of

voters and so on and it's been

linked to what happened in terms of

Donald Trump's victory and breaks

it. My concern about that sometimes

is it gets conspiratorially, I voted

to campaign but we did not lose the

referendum.

It must have been a kind

of dodgy...

Exactly, but the real

important thing is about data and

its protection and I think we need

very clear laws in this country and

elsewhere that our data should be

publicly owned, not be harvested by

private companies and used in

devious ways, I think.

Let's salute

Ben Parkinson.

Ben Parkinson,

catastrophically injured actually,

this is the mark of modern warfare,

actually, these guys are surviving

whereas in the old days they would

have died. And you would think it

would be absolutely a tick box for

this country to look after people

like Ben Parkinson but he is having

to sue the army or the MOD...

There

is a suggestion he will lose his

wheelchair.

He is not being given

the right amount of support and

financing to sustain his life as it

is now. Charities like Help For

Heroes would help him but actually,

as a country, I love this government

sends his brave people off to fight

and you get examples of innovative

being cut.

I think we can all agree,

it's awful. Thank you both very

much.

And so to the weather.

Well, this is completely absurd.

It's the middle of March,

it feels like December

and it's been snowing again.

Something should be done -

where's national leadership

when you need it!

With all the bad news, Helen

Willetts in the weather studio.

Just remember, please don't blame

the messenger for this one.

It is

treacherous, we still have an amber

warning from the Met office for the

snow and ice. It is coming down

thick and fast, the snow. You can

see it here, this is all smoke, so

showers across eastern areas. This

is the band of snow making its way

westwards so coming into the sunny

parts of Cornwall and Devon in the

next few hours. We have had reports

of eight inches for smoke for parts

of south-east Wales, 15 centimetres

or more, we could see up to 20 and

it's a slow-moving feature. Fewer

showers this afternoon but they keep

packing in in the north and east.

The best sunshine in Northern

Ireland and the west of Scotland but

again it is bitterly cold. Adding on

the strong and gale force wind,

clearly the wind chill will make it

feel even more bitter. Through this

evening and overnight we have the

issue with snow over southern and

western areas. Horrendous

conditions, but it should start to

ease in the north. Very icy to start

a Monday morning rush-hour but with

high pressure starting to descend

southwards it cuts off the easterly

wind, cutting off the very cold air.

Temperatures will recover a little

tomorrow and it is more eyes then

snow we are concerned with tomorrow.

Some treacherous conditions for

snow we are concerned with tomorrow.

Some treacherous conditions for the

rest of the day.

I'm glad I decided to go for a nice

walk in the country tomorrow.

In the Commons this week,

Jeremy Corbyn warned Theresa May not

to rush to judgement over

who was behind the Salisbury

nerve agent attack.

Much of the press, the Conservative

party, and a fair chunk

of his own backbenchers promptly

rushed to jump all over him

as a Russian appeaser.

But is that fair?

After all, he was on the unpopular

side of the argument when it

came to Iraq and Libya,

and he feels he was proved right.

Shami Chakrabarti,

Shadow Attorney General and long

time supporter of the Labour Leader

is with me now.

Good morning, can I start by asking

clearly, do you think Vladimir

Putin's government was responsible

for what happened?

What I think is

what Theresa May said, which is

there's a responsibility of the

regime either in relation to having

lost control of this chemical

weaponry or it is even more serious

and it is a malevolent directed

attack and that's an important

distinction going forward because

you are not going to get cooperation

from the state that is deliberately

targeting you but you might get

cooperation, even from a slightly

embarrassed state that has lost

control, of its stocks of chemical

weapons. That's an important

distinction and that the distinction

Jeremy was making but also a

distinction Theresa May has made

herself.

When Boris Johnson said his

is overwhelmingly likely it is

Vladimir Putin himself...

If Boris

Johnson is saying that, he must be

saying it on the basis of new

evidence that Mrs May has not yet

spoken about.

So at the moment as

far as you're concerned, it is not

absolutely clear this was directed

by the Kremlin?

That's my

understanding, it is either a loss

of control, which needs to be sorted

out if that's the issue, or it is

what the Foreign Secretary is

suggesting but if he is suggesting

that, that would be on the basis of

new evidence that has not been

shared with Jeremy Corbyn and it's

not what Mrs May has said to date.

Because a lot of the world seems to

have taken the same view including

France and Germany, that they think

Putin was responsible for this.

Have

they really, said Putin was

responsible directly?

The Russian

state.

We need to be forensic about

this, the Russian state is

responsible for its stocks or

historic stocks of chemical weapons.

You are responsible whether you lose

control or personally direct

extrajudicial killings. But what

kind of culpability is it, that's

important.

Absolutely so if you are

not yet sure it was the Russian

state doing this themselves, why are

you supporting the expulsion of 23

diplomats?

Because it is apropos --

a proportionate response. I think

Jeremy was right to support that

proportion escalation but it will

not be tit for tat. Diplomacy has an

element of protocol and dancing

within it, but the crucial thing is

to go further now and that is John

McDonnell's suite of economic

measures. Also I think to pursue the

chemical weapons Convention and

potentially to ask for inspections,

and if necessary further action at

the international level.

Let's look

at the alternative theory which is

that this material leaked out or was

sold during the dissolution of the

Soviet Union from some Russian

facility and acquired by some Mafia

gang of some kind, have you any

evidence that happened at all?

All

we have is what we have been told

and what my Privy Council colleagues

have been told by the Government.

What we have been told is what Mrs

May has said, she's outlined the two

possibilities, that is the directed

attack from the Kremlin or the loss

of control.

Entirely supposition at

this stage.

We are just repeating

what we have been told because of

course we are not in Government but

we are repeating what has been

shared with us in security briefings

and what Mrs May has said.

We seem

to be in a tit-for-tat process now,

they have expelled 23 of our

diplomats and we will respond to

that, how concerned are you with

where we are going in this crisis?

I

would personally caution against

much more tit for tat in that way. I

agree with Jane Moore, something she

said earlier, which is isn't it

important to go for economic

measures that apply not just to

Russians but to dirty money on

non-taxpaying money regardless of

the nationality of those involved.

Quite a lot of your colleagues are

not happy at least with the tone of

what Jeremy Corbyn said. The defence

spokesperson has said Russia was

definitely responsible, Sir Keir

Starmer has said there should be no

ifs nor Bortz, Russia should be

called out.

And I agree with all of

that, I repeat Russia is looking

responsible whether it is negligent

responsibility and not keeping

control of these weapons or whether

this is an extrajudicial attack but

the distinguish between the two was

important going forward.

A lot of

Labour MPs were concerned enough to

put down motions, your colleague

Chris Williamson has called them

enemies and said they should be

deselected. This culture war in the

Labour Party is bubbling up, are you

concerned this is the moment the

crack cannot be bridged?

No, and I'm

here to make it clear I am

completely not just with Jeremy but

with near Griffith, Emily Formby and

Keir Starmer. In order to be safe

and to take control of these

chemical weapons and to eliminate

them from the world, you do need to

make a distinction between

negligence and taking back control

and something that can be even more

serious, which is directed tax

against people on to a tree.

Quite a

lot of your colleagues look at

Jeremy Corbyn's office and see what

he said about Russia in the past,

and they just don't feel he is

speaking for them.

I think people

shouldn't be directing attacks on

staff it is not fair to pick on

people who cannot speak for

themselves. Jeremy is the leader of

our party but he also has a very

strong team of Shadow Cabinet

colleagues, some of whom you have

cited, and we are all at one in the

approach I have just outlined.

When

it comes to people like the

father-in-law of the police officer

who was poisoned in Salisbury who

said he felt Jeremy Corbyn was

mealy-mouthed when it came to

Russia, what you say to people

outside of the bubble looking in

from the outside and just not quite

sure about the tone?

I think the

tone is also spun, whether it is

Jeremy Corbyn's tome, which has been

robust but also appropriately

measured, or whether it is the

Defence Secretary who won minute

talks about proportionality but the

next minute says go away, this is a

very febrile moment and people's

words gets bombed by the media. That

is understandable, I'm not going

ballistic about that but obviously

people are concerned, people are

worried and that's why there's a

responsibility on everyone to try to

get our tone right.

Do you trust our

intelligence on this?

I do.

So

there's no need to send Russians

evidence of the nerve agent used? We

can accept their word it was

Novichok?

Here is the thing about

sending agents beyond this country,

either to possibly the Russians if

they are asking for it...

Or the

organisation.

The reason for doing

that is because it is the protocol

of the Convention and I believe in

pursuing these investigations under

international law because that is

how you garner the broadest

international coalition to get

support going forward.

Do you think

in the last couple of days there has

been a McCarthyite atmosphere in

this country?

I don't want to make

things worse, I want to make things

better so I'm not going to escalate

my language at this point if you

will forgive me.

Jeremy Corbyn

suggested there was McCarthyism

about and he has had a lot of abuse

hurled at him for this.

He's had a

lot of abuse hurled at him for a

very long time and I try to learn

from his dignity under fire.

There's

reports today of a new group of

Labour MPs called Start Again or

something, who are very exercised

about this shoe and others, are you

concerned we are heading towards a

position where the Labour Party

might split?

I'm not too concerned.

People have always had their

democratic prerogative to experiment

with new parties and there's been

talk in the Westminster bubble about

this.

It has gone on and on and

never happened but at some point it

might.

In past decades that have

been experiments in new party but

the Labour Party is a very fine and

broad coalition, and I actually

think it represents the new

moderation in British politics like

taking on dirty money, like

protecting people's jobs and

services. I think I am a moderate

and pretty much always have been.

All right, thank you for talking to

us.

Coming up here a little later, the

Sunday Politics with Sarah Smith.

She will be discussing Russia

with the Foreign Office Minister Sir

Alan Duncan and she'll also be

joined by Labour's Yvette Cooper,

chair of the Home Affairs

Select Committee.

That's the Sunday Politics

here on BBC One at 11 o'clock.

So far, the Russian response

to Theresa May's expulsion

of Russian personnel has been

relatively cautious

and proportional.

But it's come alongside a lot

of brutal mockery of Britain

from official Kremlin outlets.

Senior Russian spokesmen have

by and large kept off the airwaves

but I was able to catch up

with Mr Putin's Ambassador

to the European Union,

Vladimir Chizhov,

in Brussels this week.

Theresa May, the British Prime

Minister, and other Nato allies have

all said that Russia was responsible

for the nerve attack in Salisbury.

Were you?

Highly likely, they said.

Russia...

and I can assure you without

using the phraseology

like highly likely,

which has become very popular these

days, Russia had

nothing to do with it.

Boris Johnson, the Foreign

Secretary, has gone even further

and he said it's very,

very likely that Vladimir Putin

himself ordered this attack.

Well, that rests with

the responsibility of Boris Johnson,

who I believe is acting

in an inappropriate manner,

which doesn't give him credit.

This was an attack on a man widely

regarded in Russia as a traitor,

using a chemical agent regarded

as being made in Russia

and that is why many people

in Britain say it is overwhelmingly

likely the Russians

must be responsible.

And if not the Russians, who?

Well, this whole case is based

on assumptions, based on suspicions

fuelled by emotions.

You rightly referred

to Mr Skripal as a traitor,

as a defector, but you know,

I can assure you he is almost

forgotten in Russia.

He has been living in Britain

for eight years now.

Before that, I think

I should stress the point,

he was officially pardoned by

a presidential decree, which means

that whatever one can think

of him in the moral sense,

but from the legal point of view,

the Russian state have

nothing against him.

And also I should add,

his daughter, Yulia,

is a Russian citizen.

That's why, among the many

violations by the British

authorities in this case,

I will cite that it's a blatant

violation of the bilateral consular

convention by not allowing Russian

diplomats and consular officials

access to a Russian citizen

currently in hospital.

And the Russian state has now

announced a criminal investigation

into the attack on Yulia Skripal and

Mr Bush called.

Certainly the

Russian investigated committee will

request co-operation from the

British according to international

law and bilateral agreements and the

Russian side through the embassy in

London requested access to evidence,

if there is any, to the nerve agent

from the very beginning, from the

first day but was flatly refused. In

spite of that being, the obligation

on the British of the international

convention on prohibition of

chemical weapons.

This is a very

obscure nerve agent, not understood

around the world, has Russia ever

produced this agent Novichok? No.

Never? No. Russia will and has

stopped the production of any

chemical agents back in 92, you

cannot talk about chemical agents

produced by Russia, all that had

been produced previously was

produced by the Soviet Union, in

1992, but then resident Boris

Yeltsin signed a decree stopping all

production and according to the

International Convention on the

Prohibition of chemical weapons last

year in 2017 Russia destroyed all

its stockpiles, there is only one

country today which has not done so

which is still retaining its

chemical stockpiles and that is the

United States of America.

Can I be

absolutely clear then, Russia has no

stop violence of any nerve agent

whatever?

Indeed, no stop us

whatsoever.

Then there is the

question how did this agent come to

be used in Salisbury? It has been

suggested for instant during the

dissolution of the Soviet Union some

of this agent he had been stolen or

sold and ended up in the hands of

criminal gangs or other state

parties?

What is your view? Well,

why don't you ask yourself the

question, how come the British

authorities so quickly managed to

designate the nerve agent used as

something called Novichok. It can

only mean that

only mean that they had a

standard...

It has a signature, I

think, a chemical signature.

When

you have a nerve agent or whatever,

you check it against certain samples

that you retaining your

laboratories. And Porton Down as we

now all know is the largest military

facility in the United Kingdom that

has been dealing with chemical

weapons research. And it's actually

only eight miles from Salisbury.

You're not suggesting that Porton

Down is responsible for this nerve

agent?

I don't know, I don't know, I

don't have evidence of anything

being used and of course, I should

add, perhaps, that I exclude the

possibility of any stockpiles of any

chemical weapons fleeing Russia

after the collapse of the Soviet

Union. There was certain specialists

including scientists who today claim

to have been responsible for

creating some nerve agent that have

been whisked out of Russia... They

defected.

Currently residing in the

United Kingdom. They defected, they

said it was made and it was tested

and used in Uzbekistan and therefore

it was around and could have been

stolen, sold on.

I will not comment

on their words but they were

involved in certain research of

various chemical weapons, yes. In

the Soviet use.

In her first

response Theresa May has expelled 23

Russian citizens, were they spies?

Of course not, they were diplomats.

Or there any Russian spies in

Britain?

Come on! You are not asking

the right person, perhaps. Art there

any British spies in Russia?

What

are the other possibilities that

Britain has talked about, the

Magnitsky act to freeze the assets

of various people who had been using

London to wash money through London,

individuals, in some respects I

would imagine you would welcome

that?

I wouldn't care about the fate

of money being laundered in London,

of any other origin.

What about the

suggestion that members of the Royal

family and politicians and so forth

and come to Russia for the World

Cup? The World Cup was going to be a

very big moment for Russia, is this

a blow to Russia?

Well I'm sure

those members of the Royal family

who had been planning to come will

be sorry hearing that from their own

government.

It's been a very

difficult time, relations between

Russia and Britain, a whole series

of issues, alleged Russian

involvement in elections in Europe,

America, Britain as well, tensions

over the Baltic states, Ukraine and

so forth, looking ahead, what do you

see for Britain's relations with

Russia after we leave the EU?

Well,

at 1.I said to a British colleague

of mine I was looking to a bright

future with British Russian

relations after Brexit cos Britain

would no longer be confined by EU

sanctions or anything like that.

Somehow, he did not support that

view.

This period, there is almost

universal anger about British

Russian relationships in Britain at

the moment.

Gavin Williamson. And in

Russia too.

Gavin Williamson the new

Defence Secretary said Russia will

be thinking how can we cause so much

pain in Britain, damage its economy,

with its infrastructure apart, cause

thousands and thousands of deaths

and create total chaos within the

UK? That is the perspective of a

senior British Minister about your

country.

If I were a member

correctly he also said the wording,

Russia should shut up and go away,

let me assure that Russia is not

going to shut up and will certainly

not go away.

There has been a sort

of sense in Britain that Russia was

almost mocking us about this

terrible attack. Some of your...

Have talked about the climate being

unhealthy parishioner defectors,

falling out of holdings, defectors

eating poison and so on, almost as

if people in Moscow regard this as a

family matter.

It's not a funny

matter and the latest news I heard

from Moscow, the launch of two

criminal investigations by the

Russian investigative committee on

damage to the health of the Russian

citizen, Yulia Skripal and the

unexplained, mysterious death of

Nikolai Glushkov.

To be clear,

Russian investigators will come to

British police shortly and said we

want access to this investigation,

to work alongside you phone it comes

to what happened in Salisbury and we

would like to see the nerve agent

used and we would like to see proper

access?

Of course they will. First

in correspondence and then perhaps

should a personal visit be required

they will come. And actually Russia

has offered to call operate on the

Salisbury incident from the very

outset but we did not get any answer

whatsoever from the Foreign Office

or any other government agency.

Listening to that is the Foreign

Secretary, Boris Johnson.

Welcome. We have to be very clear

and colourful about the evidence in

this very serious matter, you have

said it is overwhelmingly likely

that Vladimir Putin is responsible,

the ambassador brush that aside, why

do you say that?

We gave the

Russians a very clear choice on the

Prime Minister said on Monday as I

said to the Russian ambassador to

the UK, either help us to understand

how the stockpiles of Novichok have

gone missing and how some of that

could have turned up on the streets

of Wiltshire in this way or else I'm

afraid we will be forced as the

prime ministers said in the House of

Commons, to draw the conclusion as

we did in the case of Alexander

Litvinenko, that the Trail of

culpability leads inexorably to the

Kremlin and I think listening to the

Russian response, listening again to

the response of the Russian

ambassador to be you with his

satirical suggestion that this was

done by UK agents from Porton Down,

this is not the response of a

country that really believes itself

to be innocent, this is not the

response of a country that wants to

engage in getting to the bottom of

that.

The Prime Minister told the

House of Commons the red two

possible explanations either this

was a deliberate attack by the

Russian state or else the Novichok

had come out and become, had got

into the hands of criminal gangs,

you seem to be excluding the latter?

Well, we gave the Russians every

opportunity to come up with an

alternative hypothesis such as the

one that you have just described and

they haven't and their response has

been a sort of mixture of smug

sarcasm and denial, obfuscation and

delay. So what we are doing, on the

Novichok and the nerve agent, what

we will do is tomorrow, technical

experts from the Organisation for

the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

will come from the Hague to the UK,

we will share the samples with them,

they will then be tested by the most

reputable possible international

laboratories. And I might just say

in response to the ointment from the

Russian ambassador, about the

Russian stockpiles of chemical

weapons, we had evidence within the

last ten years that Russia has not

only been investigating the delivery

of nerve agents for the purposes of

assassination but it has also been

creating and stop piling Novichok.

That was a direct like that I was

being given?

You will get that and

that is exactly the tactics that we

have come to expect from Russia over

the last few years. One of the

things that has really struck me in

the course of the last few days as

we've been talking to friends and

colleagues around the world, is the

difference between their reaction

this time and their reaction to the

death of Alexander Litvinenko. And

then back in 2006, there was a much

more hesitation, watch more people

saying perhaps it could be rogue

elements of the Russian state and so

on and so forth. Now you have people

such as Nikki Haley, the US

ambassador to the UN, with her very

powerful denunciation of Russia and

my colleague on Friday in London

pointing the finger squarely at

Russia and I think what that

indicates is the change in people's

attitudes towards Russia because of

the experience of the last ten

years.

A change in attitude, their

attitude to us, they don't really

care any more?

I think it's obvious

they do care and I think that is one

of the reasons that the UK is as it

were, in the Kremlin's Ross House

because they look at what's ours and

they think, this is the country that

time and again has called Russia

out, has stood up to Russia when it

comes to Crimea, to what they'd been

doing in Syria and just to get back

to the point I was making just now

about... Go on.

You absolutely sure

it's this mysterious thing called

Novichok? We talk about it all the

time, how are we sure?

I obviously,

to the best of our knowledge, this

is a Russian-made nerve agent that

falls within the category Novichok,

made only by Russia and to give back

to the point about the international

reactions which is so fascinating,

people have all now experienced

whether it's in America, Germany,

France, to say nothing of the Baltic

countries, they have all experienced

Russian meddling, malign, disrupt

Russian behaviour over the last

years, they can see a country going

in the wrong direction and that is

why they are so inclined now not to

give Russia the benefit of the doubt

and to stand shoulder to shoulder

with the UK.

Do you think given that

background that our defence spending

is enough, Tobias Ellwood says it's

no longer enough, what happened to

the dollar but the threat we now

face from the east, we need to

protect ourselves better as a

country than we have been doing and

we need to spend more?

We are one of

the biggest spenders on defence in

Natal, as you know, we contribute

about 20% to European defence

spending already and it's quite

right we should spend well on our

defences and...

The argument is we

should be spending more than the

target.

We must make sure we are

adequately and properly defended and

that is the case that I make and

other... And other ministers

certainly have been making. When it

comes to the defences of this

country, we are also ensuring that

we are protected against cyber

attack and attacks on the critical

national infrastructure and other

such threats.

We read today there

has been increased worry about

attacks on the infrastructure,

electricity supply, nuclear power

stations, water and so forth, is

that something the government is

worried about at the moment?

As I

say something obviously that is a

threat that has changed over the

last few years, cyber attacks are a

relatively new development but we

have the national cyber Security

Centre, we have fantastic

preparations against such threats.

Do you think the death of Nikolai

Glushkov is connected to this

affair?

I have no evidence of any

connection.

The ambassador also said

the Russians are prosecuting the

deaths of the daughter of Mr Skripal

and Mr Glushkov because they are

both Russian citizens, will they get

cooperation?

We have wanted

co-operation from the Russians in

this matter for some days and we

have been greeted with a lot of

sarcasm, and I think plainly an

attitude of a country that is

guilty. If we can genuinely be of

assistance to the Russians in

getting to the bottom of what has

happened, we will do that. I doubt

they are entirely serious.

What if

Russian investigators arrive in

London and say we are interested in

the attack on Yulia and the death of

Mr Skripal, we would like access to

the investigation we are conducting,

they will be given that?

We will do

everything we can to assist in

getting to the bottom of what has

happened. Whether it is appropriate

to have Russian investigators on UK

soil engaged in trying to get to the

bottom of this, I somewhat doubt,

but what we will certainly do...

Help as far as we can.

We will

ensure that, I'm afraid the

ambassador was completely misleading

about the UK's obligations under the

organisation for the Prohibition of

chemical weapons, we have followed

those obligations to the letter and

what we will be doing now is getting

the samples and making sure they are

available to technical experts to

allow them to elucidate exactly what

they are. I think you would agree,

they are a rather more reliable and

I think the British people have more

confidence and they do than in any

Russian investigation.

Let's move on

to what happens next. We kicked out

23 of their people we regard as

spies, they kicked out 23 of hours,

tit for tat, is that that?

There is

a normal symmetry in these

diplomatic affairs and you would

expect that.

Is it going to go

further than that symmetry is what

I'm asking.

We will discuss this

week what further measures, if any,

we may want to take what I would

just stress this. The UK is already

pursuing a number of measures,

hardening our borders, of course

pursuing the diplomatic expulsions,

but we are also going to be using

the tools that are available to us

under existing statute to pursue

those who may have corruptly

obtained their wealth. We were going

further with the Magnitsky clause in

the sanctions Bill so all these

things are moving forward.

Two weeks

ago the Labour Party put down

Magnitsky act amendments and the

Conservatives voted against them,

why was that?

There were

deficiencies in the way the

amendments were drafted which didn't

make them suitable but we are

working to get provisions that will

allow those who have been

responsible for gross violations of

human rights to be prosecuted and

not to be able to come to this

country.

To be clear, as a

government you are going to go after

named individuals who have in the

past been able to wash their money

through London, invest in housing

and so forth, and grab their money?

We live in a democracy under the

rule of law, it's not open to me as

a politician to direct the

law-enforcement agencies to draft

and such, that's what they do

Russia. We have statute now since

April last year under the criminal

finance act to do this. We have said

that where people have obtained

wealth by corruption, and where we

can see a link with the Kremlin,

with Vladimir Putin, it may be

possible to have unexplained wealth

orders and other sanctions on those

individuals, and that work is going

on now. You would not expect me to

reveal names.

Labour says part of

the Conservative hesitation on this

is that you as a party have been

taking far too much Russian money

for far too long. There's the

for far too long. There's the case

of one person who peddle hundred and

£60,000 to have a game of tennis

with you. Did that game take place?

Can I make a point about this

whole...

You are going to say good

Russians and bad Russians, I know

that. I was going to say back to you

that this lady's husband was a

minister of Vladimir Putin and given

an award by Vladimir Putin so he was

close to the regime, and you as a

party were prepared to take £160,000

from her so she could have a game of

tennis with Boris Johnson.

If there

is evidence of corruption in the way

that gentleman obtained his wealth,

then it is well within... It is

possible to deprive him of his

wealth, with an unexplained wealth

order. That is a matter for the

authorities, not for me, and it's

important that because people are

e-mailing me from Russia, who feel

that Russians...

I agree with that.

Russians themselves are in no way

the object of our wrath.

Did the

tennis game actually happen?

It did.

Do you know enough about the origins

of that money? And she has now paid

£30,000 to sit next to Gavin

Williamson and have dinner with him,

I happy about that?

Unless evidence

is produced against individual

Russians, I don't think the entire

nation should be...

It is a

difficult balance I absolutely agree

with that but...

There are many

Russians who have gone to this

country, made their lives here and

contributed magnificently to our

culture and society. They feel

threatened...

I understand that, but

on the other hand, let me remind you

what the widow of Alexander

Litvinenko said, she said the

Conservatives need to be selective

who they are friends with. When you

allow people with money to come to

your country and make a business,

you need to be sure what kind of

money these people bring to your

country. All I'm saying is it is

very difficult to know the source of

the money you take.

That's why we

have the national Crime Agency, we

have the national economic crime

unit. That's what they are there to

do. They are there to get to the

bottom of whether somebody's wealth

has been obtained corruptly or not

but it is important we do not allow

my as of suspicion about all

Russians in London and indeed all

which Russians in London to be

created. Some of them may have

obtained their wealth by... And I

have to say it is quite

extraordinary at a time when you

have two people lying gravely ill in

hospital, in Salisbury, when a

police officer is still not out of

hospital, for the fire somehow to be

turned on Conservative Party

funding. To the best of my

knowledge, all possible checks have

been made and they will continue to

be made.

You will have seen the

story this morning about Cambridge

and this data collection company in

trouble for harvesting information

from Facebook and using it to target

potential voters. They were involved

in the Brexit referendum and

American elections as well, they

have been summoned back to the House

of Commons, do you think there

should be a proper investigation

into this?

I've got to be honest, it

is not something I have focused on

but again, the general point, if

there is some crime, I'm sure the

law will follow its course.

The

Brexit select committee has

suggested we may have to delay the

trigger of Article 50 because we are

not ready, what is your response?

I

don't think that is true and we are

making great progress in the

negotiations and I hope we will get

a good deal on implementation period

in March. House of Commons voted

overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50

and let's get on with it.

Another

report today says our border

arrangements simply won't be ready

in time, are you concerned the thing

is going to slip?

No, I think what

most people in this country want,

whether they voted to leave or

remain, they want us to get on with

it and do it.

Why did you write a

letter to the Prime Minister saying

there might be a hard Irish border?

What I said, I don't wish to...

I

have the quote here. It is wrong to

see our task is maintaining no

border. Even if the hard border is

reintroduced we would expect 95% of

goods to pass... So you used the

phrase hard border twice because

it's interesting...

It's the policy

of the Government not to have a hard

border and that's what we will

produce. The Prime Minister in her

speech produced a number of

solutions for the avoidance of a

hard border and that's what I was

advocating.

You said you were going

to publish the letter, when are you

going to do that?

We do not... It's

up to the media organisations that

leaked a part of it, if they choose

to...

You said you were going to.

You have changed your mind.

We do

not as a matter of course respond to

leaks by putting holding in the

public domain but I can assure you

the letter said the exact opposite

of what you claimed it said.

I have

just read a bit of it, these are

words and words mean things and so

forth.

As it happens they don't mean

what you want them to mean.

The

Government's aim should be to stop

this border from big coming

significantly harder -- from

becoming significantly harder.

Publish it!

What I was saying is

clearly in line with what the

Government as a whole has been

saying for a long time which is

there is no need to have a hard

border. There are ways of avoiding

it, as the Prime Minister said in

her excellent Mansion House speech

and I suggest you quote that and

read that.

OK, do you think Russia

intervened in the Brexit referendum?

I have no evidence of that.

You said

in the past you don't think they

successfully intervened.

I have no

evidence they successfully

intervened, no.

On last Brexit

related question, we haven't spoken

for little while, as one of the

great cheerleaders for Brexit, when

you look at what's happening now and

the fact the European Court will

have some influence on us after we

leave, that we will be paying money

into some agencies and the timescale

of this, are you completely cheerful

it has turned out as you wanted?

I

do, I think the Mansion House speech

was a great step forward and I think

it shows exactly the type of deal we

want to get. We are not going to

have the influence of the European

Court of Justice. I don't know why

you are saying this BBC claptrap. We

are not going to be paying in after

we leave. Yes, there will be on

implementation period but after we

come out we will have what is

effectively a gigantic free-trade

deal with all sorts of bolt ons and

the advantage of the new

arrangements, as the Prime Minister

said at Mansion House, is that it

will be possible for either side to

do things in their own way and there

will be an independent arbitration

panel that will be able to decide...

Can I finish the point. There will

be an independent arbitration panel

that will be able to decide whether

or not there is a distortion of

trade. On money, borders and laws,

you are seeing the fulfilment of the

pledged to take back control.

We

have run out of time. Boris Johnson

for now, thank you.

Now a look at what's coming up

straight after this programme.

In Brighton at ten o'clock, we are

asking whether the people should

have the final say on the terms of

the Brexit deal. As the case of baby

Alfie Evans is referred to the

Supreme Court, should doctors have

the final decision?

We're out of time,

thanks to all my guests.

Harold Wilson used to say that

a week was a long time in politics -

it feels like a lifetime just now.

I have no idea what we'll

have for you next week.

See you then.