Nerve agent in Salisbury

satriales wrote:I missed the PM statement and Corbyn's response but just read the text and I don't see anything majorly controversial in there. Tory MPs were saying he refused to condemn the attack when he clearly did exactly that in his final sentence:

Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of her statement and echo her words about the service of our emergency and public services.

The attack in Salisbury was an appalling act of violence. Nerve agents are abominable if used in any war. 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. When it comes to the use of chemical weapons on British soil, it is essential that the Government work with the United Nations to strengthen its chemical weapons monitoring system and involve the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

The Prime Minister said on Monday:

“either this was a direct act by the Russian state…or the Russian Government lost control of their potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.”—[Official Report, 12 March 2018; Vol. 637, c. 620-21.]

Our response must be decisive, proportionate and based on clear evidence. If the Government believe 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.

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 IX(2)? How has she responded to the Russian Government’s request for a sample of the agent used in the Salisbury attack to run their own tests? Has high-resolution trace analysis been run on a sample of the nerve agent, and has that revealed any evidence as to the location of its production or the identity of its perpetrators?

Can the Prime Minister update the House on what conversations, if any, she has had with the Russian Government? While suspending planned high-level contacts, does she agree that is essential to retain a robust dialogue with Russia, in the interests of our own and wider international security?

With many countries 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 allies to join us in calling 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 the Labour Benches have expressed before, a matter of huge regret that our country’s diplomatic capacity has been stripped back, with cuts of 25% in the last five years. It is—[Interruption.]

Mr Speaker
Order. The right hon. 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 could not understand a word of what the Foreign Secretary just said, but his behaviour demeans his office.

It is in moments such as these that Governments realise how vital strong diplomacy and political pressure are for our security and national interest. The measures we take have to be effective, not just for the long-term security of our citizens but to secure a world free of chemical weapons. Can the Prime Minister outline what discussions she has had with our partners in the European Union, NATO and the UN and what willingness there was to take multilateral action? While the poisonings of Sergei and Yulia Skripal are confronting us today, what efforts are being made by the Government to reassess the death of Mr Skripal’s wife, Liudmila, who died in 2012, and the deaths of his elder brother and son in the past two years?

We have a duty to speak out against the abuse of human rights by the Putin Government and their supporters, both at home and abroad, and I join many others in this House in paying tribute to the many campaigners in Russia for human rights, justice and democracy in that country. 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 become stupendously rich by looting their country and subsequently use London to protect their wealth. We welcome the Prime Minister today clearly committing to support the Magnitsky amendments and implementing them as soon as possible, as Labour has long pushed for.

Yesterday Nikolai Glushkov, a Russian exile who was close friends with the late oligarch Boris Berezovsky, was found dead in his London home. What reassurances can the Prime Minister give to citizens of Russian origin living in Britain that they are safe here?

The events in Salisbury earlier this month are abominable and have been rightly condemned across the House. Britain has to build a consensus with our allies, and we support the Prime Minister in taking multilateral and firm action to ensure that we strengthen the chemical weapons convention and that this dreadful, appalling act, which we totally condemn, never happens again in our country.

Dual wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Dual wrote:Sorry I forgot you can only read sarcasm with a wink emoji. I don't think he is an actual Russian spy.

You are famous on here for people "not getting" you. A wink emoji might be helpful if you are trying to make a sarcastic point.

He is a sympathiser though and he's comments are incredibly out of line. Just because he's the opposition leader doesn't mean he has to be contrarian on every subject. He should be backing up May on this when our citizens are at risk.

A sympathiser for what? Modern Russia? Stalinist Russia? The IRA? Hamas?

Corbyn is an idiot, but there's nothing to suggest he is a Putin sympathiser.

Didn't he appear on Russian state television?

twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/973865987102707712

Moggy wrote:But, I also don’t believe he is a Russian agent.

Jeremy Corbyn was accused of "appeasement" towards Russia as MPs - including his own backbenchers - voiced anger at the Labour leader's apparent reluctance to directly blame Moscow for the Salisbury nerve agent attack.

Mr Corbyn was heckled in the House of Commons on Wednesday as he responded to the Prime Minister's statement setting out a range of retaliatory measures the UK will take against Russia.

The Labour leader described the Salisbury attack as an "appalling act of violence", but urged the Government to ensure its response is "decisive, proportionate and based on clear evidence".

Mr Corbyn also called on Theresa May to maintain "robust dialogue" with Russia, despite her announcement that high-level bilateral contacts are to be suspended.

However, the Labour leader drew ire for failing to explicitly back the Prime Minister's assertion of Russian responsibility for the attack.

Repeating Moscow's demands, he also asked whether Mrs May had accepted the Russian government's request for them to be handed a sample of the nerve agent, in order for them to run their own tests.

Mr Corbyn was then barracked from the Conservative benches for using the exchanges - in which MPs largely supported Mrs May's response to what she branded an "unlawful use of force by the Russian state against the UK" - to suggest the UK's diplomatic capacity has been reduced as a result of cuts.

The PM said: "This is not a question of our diplomacy, of what diplomatic support we have around the world.

"This is the question of the culpability of the Russian state for an act on our soil."

Earlier this week, Mr Corbyn was accused of failing to offer unity and of party political point-scoring in the wake of the Salisbury attack, after he highlighted Russia-linked donations to the Conservative Party.

Mrs May went on to criticise Mr Corbyn's response to her statement, claiming he "could have taken the opportunity - as the UK Government has done - to condemn the culpability of the Russian state".

A number of high-profile Labour backbenchers then voiced their own disapproval with their party leader's comments.

"Can I assure the Prime Minister that most of us on these benches fully support the action she is taking," said former Labour cabinet minister Ben Bradshaw.

Labour's Yvette Cooper, chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, was cheered by MPs on all sides of the chamber when she said Russia's actions should be met with "unequivocal condemnation".

The PM, in her response, thanked Ms Cooper for the tone of her comments and acknowledged they were "representative of many" on the Labour benches.

Further criticism came from the DUP's Sammy Wilson. He said: "We welcome the decisive action that has been taken by the Prime Minister today and it sits in contrast with the policy of appeasement that we have heard from the frontbench of the Labour Party."

His comments prompted anger from Labour MPs, with Chuka Umunna saying they "do not represent the views of the majority of our voters, members or MPs".

Another Labour MP told Sky News there was "sheer fury" at Mr Corbyn's response.

They said: "He has been briefed on privy council terms. What more evidence does he require?"

"Since the beginning of the week, the United Kingdom has kept France closely informed of the evidence gathered by British investigators and evidence of Russia’s responsibility in the attack,” the president’s Elysee office said, after a telephone call between Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May.

“France agrees with the United Kingdom that there is no other plausible explanation and reiterates its solidarity with its ally.”

Preezy wrote:I bet this'll end up with Russia banning any UK broadcasters from covering the World Cup. Can Russia stop the England team from entering the country? Might be doing us a favour...

Death's Head wrote:

Preezy wrote:I bet this'll end up with Russia banning any UK broadcasters from covering the World Cup. Can Russia stop the England team from entering the country? Might be doing us a favour...

We'll have our own world cup with just England in. Probably won't win, but should get a last 8 place.

SandyCoin wrote:

Death's Head wrote:

Preezy wrote:I bet this'll end up with Russia banning any UK broadcasters from covering the World Cup. Can Russia stop the England team from entering the country? Might be doing us a favour...

We'll have our own world cup with just England in. Probably won't win, but should get a last 8 place.

I'm expecting a lot of dodgy decisions this world cup, especially in England games. Hell, this world cup might even put 2002 to shame for suspicious refereeing.