---

Russia

Thank you, Mr. Bayley, for overseeing our proceedings this morning. Not only because it is customary, but because of his deep knowledge and interest in Russia, I congratulate the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) on securing the debate, and on the knowledge and perspective that he brings to it. It may predate our time in the House, but in previous years there was always a conversation about Russia with some analysis of Marx and other issues associated with that, but today we have heard from four different Marks. The hon. Members for The Wrekin, for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Field), for Rayleigh (Mr. Francois) and for Cheadle (Mark Hunter), all brought their own perspective as Marks and their own kind of Marksist analysis to the conversation. We also heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew), who raised an important point. He rightly did not want to provide additional details, but I am happy to discuss it with him formally and in more detail if he wishes. I thank him for his kind words about the support of Foreign Office staff, which will be heard with great gratitude by those who have been working on the important issue that he raised. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) and others for their points about the work that our ambassador, Tony Brenton and his fantastic team do to look after UK interests in Russia. As my hon. Friend alluded to, they sometimes work in unjustifiably difficult circumstances. I wish only that we had had the opportunity to listen to the end of his excellent speech. I hope that, at some point, we will have the opportunity to hear the rest of his analysis. I shall now deal with the substance of the points made by hon. Members. I shall come to the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Tony Lloyd) later in my short comments. I will not have time to respond to the dozens of questions that have been asked. I thank the Opposition Front-Bench teams, for not only the content, but the tone of their remarks. It is important that we have unity on this important matter across the European Union, although I do not want to make a wider point about that, because it is for another day. That we have had two strong, unanimously agreed EU presidency statements, is of real significance and heightens the importance of our co-operative role in the European Union. It is also important that the House of Commons and the House of Lords speak with one voice on the matter, both in their content and tone. Opposition Front Benchers have done that today and it is important that, where possible, we retain that consensus in content and tone. As we now know, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central is well aware, tone is often as important as content in some aspects of our conversations with our friends in Russia. I shall make some general points and then come on to specifics. It is important to say clearly that the UK is a partner with Russia in more international organisations than almost any other country. Those organisations include the UN Security Council, the G8, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the Council of Europe. The UK’s relationship with Russia is crucial and we must not lose sight of the fact that Russia is a key player in enabling us to deliver on our international priorities, including Afghanistan, climate change, chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, energy and, of course, trade and investment. Hon. Members have already reflected on the fact that, in 2006, the UK was the largest foreign investor in Russia. In the same year, our trading relationship with Russia reached an all-time high, with annual exports of more than £3 billion, which my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary noted in his statement to the House on 16 July. Russia is, and will remain, a key international partner of the United Kingdom. It is for precisely that reason that we need a relationship based on trust and mutual respect. All hon. Members recall the detail of the horrific circumstances in which Mr. Litvinenko, a British citizen, was murdered in the heart of London, and in which hundreds of residents and visitors were put at risk. I emphasise that it is precisely because we have ambitions for the UK-Russia relationship that we needed to take the measures that my right hon. Friend announced in his statement on 16 July. The Government neither sought nor welcomed the situation, but it was vital that we addressed it. A set of shared values is the foundation of an effective international partnership. Russian failure to co-operate made inevitable the necessary specific, targeted action that we took. Our action was intended to uphold the key individual rights and vital principles of independent judicial process in the United Kingdom. In that context, we must ensure that such acts do not happen again. Ensuring the safety of British citizens and our visitors, as well as the 40,000-strong Russian community in the United Kingdom, is of paramount importance. We have been especially heartened by the statements of support from not only the European Union, but the United States. My hon. Friends the Member for Rhondda and for Manchester, Central asked about a number of specific points and made some telling observations about human rights in Russia. In response to that, I repeat comments that I made to last week’s meeting of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, on our relationship with Russia and our attitude to human rights there. Russia has not made the progress on human rights that many of us expected and hoped that it would in the early to mid-1990s. Hon. Members have reflected on the limits to media freedom, the murders and intimidation of a number of journalists, the heavy-handed policing of political demonstrations, and restrictions on political parties. At each opportunity, the United Kingdom Government have sought to raise our concerns with the Russian authorities. This is not about seeking to export UK values, as some have said, but about our determination to ensure that Russia upholds international standards of human rights and freedom. That is what is at stake in this matter.