PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Ukraine - 18 December 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

With permission, I will update the House on Ukraine.

As we prepare for Christmas, the people of Ukraine are fighting. It is their 1,394th day of resistance since Putin’s full-scale invasion, and their fourth Christmas of the war. I would like to update the House on the work that we are doing to bring a just and lasting peace to Ukraine by ensuring that it is in the best possible position on the battlefield and at the negotiating table. A small number of members of our armed forces are at the heart of that work, whether they are delivering military training in the UK, transporting kit to Ukraine, or helping to develop innovative new warfighting capabilities. Last week, our armed forces and our country lost one of our brightest and best, Lance Corporal George Hooley. He was a model soldier who was tragically killed in Ukraine observing trials of a new defensive drone system, well away from the frontline. I know that the whole House will have been moved by the final letter he wrote to his family, which they released yesterday to coincide with his repatriation, and that the whole House will join me in sending our heartfelt thoughts and condolences to all his family, friends and colleagues.

This Government and this House will stand with our Ukrainian friends for as long as it takes. Twelve months ago, I set out five areas in which this Government would increase that support, and with the backing of Members across this House and the commitment of countless defence personnel, partners in industry and allied nations, we have delivered on all five. First, we have strengthened Ukraine’s military capabilities, with a record £4.5 billion military support package this year. That support package includes supplies of tens of thousands of rounds of advanced missiles and ammunition; 85,000 drones, up from the 10,000 gifted last year; and the new Gravehawk air defence system, co-developed with our Danish partners. Secondly, we have now trained more than 62,000 Ukrainians in the UK, alongside our Operation Interflex allies, and we have extended that programme until at least the end of 2026.

Thirdly, to boost Ukraine’s indigenous defence industrial base so that its destiny is increasingly in its own hands, I have led further trade missions to Kyiv. We have also signed new Government-to-Government co-operation agreements that have enhanced the sharing of battlefield technologies, and, in March, we facilitated the £1.6 billion deal for 5,000 lightweight air defence missiles. That supports 700 jobs at Thales in Belfast. This demonstrates how growing defence spending across the globe can act as an engine for growth across all our nations and regions in the UK.

Fourthly, the UK has ramped up our international leadership, with the Defence Secretary stepping up in the spring to co-chair, alongside Germany, the Ukraine Defence Contact Group of over 50 nations. Since then, our UDCG partners have pledged over £50 billion of military support for Ukraine, and at Tuesday’s UDCG meeting, we confirmed the UK’s biggest single-year investment in air defence for Ukraine. I am pleased to confirm to the House that the UK is providing £600 million-worth of air defence systems, missiles and automated turrets to shoot down Russian drones and defend Ukrainian civilians. This includes Raven systems to protect frontline units, Gravehawk systems that reinforce Ukraine’s ability to protect key infrastructure from Russia’s deep-strike barrages, and counter-drone turrets designed specifically to defeat Shahed-style attack drones at scale and at lower cost.

Fifthly and finally, alongside our allies we have significantly ramped up sanctions and economic pressure on the Russian economy. We have sanctioned Russia’s largest oil majors; lowered the crude oil price cap alongside EU partners, contributing to a 35% fall in Russia’s oil revenues year on year; introduced a maritime services ban on Russian liquefied natural gas, which will be phased in over the next year; and announced our intention to ban the import of oil products of Russian origin that have been refined in third countries.

Just this morning, we announced a further 24 sanction designations across the Russian oil, military and financial sectors to further ramp up economic pressure on Putin. As the Prime Minister said to the coalition of the willing last month, the UK is ready to move with the EU to provide financial support for Ukraine based on the value of immobilised Russian assets. We are working with EU and G7 partners to advance this aim, and I hope for further positive discussions on it today.

We have tightened sanctions, strengthened alliances, boosted industrial co-operation, delivered military training, and provided the biggest annual package of UK military support for Ukraine to date. Yesterday, we went further, with the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary calling time on Roman Abramovich’s inaction. The Government have issued a licence that enables the transfer of more than £2.5 billion from the sale of Chelsea football club to benefit the victims of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. We urge Abramovich to honour the commitments he made over three years ago or face court action.

Twelve months ago, I pledged that this Government would provide iron-clad support for Ukraine. That is what we have delivered, and it is what we will continue to deliver for as long as Putin continues his barbaric assault on the Ukrainian people. I know that that support will continue to enjoy cross-party support in this House.

What was not on the table last December was peace talks. On Monday, the Prime Minister was in Berlin with European leaders to advance President Trump’s peace initiative. The leaders welcomed the significant progress that has been made, and reiterated their commitment to work together to provide robust security guarantees and support economic recovery as part of any peace agreement. We have worked determinedly with our French counterparts to establish a coalition of the willing, which now consists of 36 countries, and a Multinational Force Ukraine, which is an essential pillar of the credible security guarantees required to deter Putin from coming back for more territory in the future.

It has been the position of this Government from the outset that Ukraine’s voice must be at the heart of any peace talks. That is what we have worked to achieve—not just because that is what our values and our international norms and laws dictate, but because practically, Ukraine is too militarily powerful and too determined to defend its sovereignty for peace to be built over the country’s head.

While a pattern has emerged of Russia claiming battlefield successes at opportune political moments, its claims have been exposed as disinformation time and time again. Russia has suffered over 1 million casualties to gain around 1% of Ukrainian territory since the stabilisation of the frontline in 2022. In more than a year of fighting for the comparatively small city of Pokrovsk, Russia has advanced only 15 km—equivalent to 40 metres a day—and although Putin claimed to have finally taken that city ahead of the recent visit of the American negotiating team, it is our defence intelligence’s assessment that pockets of Ukrainian resistance continue to operate there. Right across the frontline, it is Ukraine’s continued strength on the battlefield that gives it strength at the negotiating table, so we will continue to work with our allies to boost that strength and secure the credible security guarantees needed to underpin a just and lasting peace.

As we approach the fifth year of fighting since Russia’s full-scale invasion, this Government are in no doubt that the frontline of UK and European security continues to run through Ukraine. Twelve months ago, there was no clear route to ending the war; today, the US-initiated peace process represents the brightest path towards securing a just and lasting peace that we have seen since the start of the full-scale invasion. To support those diplomatic efforts, we are accelerating joint work with the US on security guarantees. The Defence Secretary directed military chiefs this week to review and update the Multinational Force Ukraine military plans, so that we are ready to deploy when peace comes. That includes revising and raising readiness levels as we continue to work with allies to maximise pressure on Putin’s war machine, to strengthen Ukraine’s hand on the battlefield and to grow its defence industrial base.

Russia’s economy is getting weaker: military spending is around 40% of the budget. Its VAT is rising and its social spending is falling. We will continue to work with our allies to tighten the screw on the Russian economy, to provide more support for Ukraine and to lay the foundations for the just and lasting peace that the Ukrainian people so deserve and want. With increasing grey-zone attacks across Europe, Ukraine’s security remains our security. I commend that approach, and this statement, to the House.

I call the shadow Minister.

I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. On behalf of His Majesty’s Opposition, I echo the Minister’s rightful tribute to Lance Corporal George Hooley of the Parachute Regiment, who gave his life for the cause of freedom while serving in Ukraine. His sacrifice will never be forgotten.

There are things that we welcome in this statement, including the imposition of further sanctions and the provision of new equipment, including drones, missiles and in particular air defence equipment for Ukraine. We must not forget that Vladimir Putin is a former KGB colonel who has sanctioned the barbaric use of highly accurate cruise missiles against children’s hospitals in Ukraine. In particular, I agree with the Minister that no enduring settlement of the war can be reached over the heads of the Ukrainians. A world war one Admiral, Sir Jackie Fisher, once remarked, “Ultimately, all nations desire peace…but peace on their terms.” We cannot allow peace on Putin’s terms, as that peace would surely not last for long.

It is also worth reminding our American allies that article 5 of the Washington treaty has only ever been invoked once—by them, in 2001, following the appalling attack on the twin towers. Thousands of Americans were murdered that day, as were several hundred Britons. When the Americans rightfully called for help, within weeks British special forces were working alongside their American counterparts, killing terrorists in the caves of Tora Bora. Alliances work both ways. For the record, when the call came, we turned up.

The Minister also made reference to the coalition of the willing. However, if British troops were to participate, they would need to have modern, effective equipment. That brings me to the elephant in the House: where is the long-awaited defence investment plan? Prior to the summer recess, the Defence Secretary assured us that the DIP would be published in the autumn. As the autumn came and went, it slipped right, but Ministers remained adamant that the DIP would still be published before the House rose for Christmas. So where on earth is it?

As there were multiple references to industry in his statement, let me say to the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry that our defence industry will rightly be furious at this continued delay. To give just one example, we still have no decision on the new medium helicopter—a programme vital for the future of Leonardo’s workforce of thousands at Yeovil. Roberto Cingolani, the corporate CEO of Leonardo, said recently:

“We cannot subsidise Yeovil forever”.

That frustration will be repeated up and down our defence manufacturing base, from primes to fourth-tier subcontractors, the latter of whom struggle to subsidise anything at all. Is it any wonder that Mr Kevin Craven, the chief executive of ADS, said only yesterday in the Financial Times that the

“delay in releasing the Defence Investment Plan…is frustrating, to say the least”?

If we are to defend the Ukrainians successfully, we have to be able to defend ourselves. At the Liaison Committee on Monday, the Chairman of the Defence Select Committee, who as ever is in his place, told the Prime Minister:

“the Government does not seem able to agree on the money involved. It cannot deliver the defence investment plan on time. It means that things are moving very slowly, rather than moving at pace, given the threats from adversaries.”

Is it any wonder that his all-party Committee recently described the Government’s progress on increasing war readiness in Britain as “glacial”?

We also welcome the ongoing financial commitment to Ukraine, which follows a similar path to our approach when in government. Would that we had such financial clarity at home. The three distinguished authors of the strategic defence review were adamant that it required defence expenditure of 3% of GDP to deliver it. But the Government cannot even give the year in which that will be reached because they are incapable inter-departmentally of agreeing it. Moreover, in-year—now—Defence Ministers are pursuing an efficiency savings exercise—“savings cuts” in pub English—of £2.6 billion in the Department’s operating budget, which is materially affecting our readiness for war and thus our ability to deter it.

In summary, our commitment across this House to the brave Ukrainians remains unwavering, but as someone once famously said, “To govern is to choose.” Yet again, the Government have avoided making choices, moving key capability decisions even further to the right yet again. When it comes to the future procurement of vital military equipment for the defence of the United Kingdom and our allies, they have kicked the can so far down the road that we can no longer see the can at all—even with an Ajax. In contrast, while our Ministers prevaricate, our Polish allies are digging anti-tank ditches along the border with Belarus.

The Romans had a saying: “Si vis pacem, para bellum” —he who desires peace should prepare for war in order to deter it. The Conservatives announced a £50 billion sovereign defence fund this morning to do precisely that.

I wish a merry Christmas to the right hon. Gentleman. First, I thank him for his support for the investment that the UK is making in Ukrainian air defences; we are spending £4.5 billion on Ukraine this year—the most that we have ever spent as a country. It is a really important statement, and the more powerful because it is backed on a cross-party basis. I appreciate his comments about Ukraine in that respect. It is absolutely right that we support Ukraine in shooting down Russian drones and missiles that are targeting civilians in particular, as well as protecting its frontline.

It is important that we value our alliances, and we continue to do so. We have a NATO-first defence policy, as set out in the strategic defence review. We are very clear about our priority focus on the Euro-Atlantic, securing our backyard. That includes working more closely and deeply with our European friends, our NATO allies, our Joint Expeditionary Force partners and Ukraine, as well as supporting and continuing to work with our friends in the United States.

When it comes to the DIP, I believe the right hon. Gentleman was at Defence questions on Monday and will have heard the Defence Secretary say very clearly that he is working flat out between now and the end of the year to finalise it. He continues to do so. On industry, we will continue to sign contracts. We have signed over 1,000 contracts since the general election, 83% of which have gone to British companies. We will continue to back British defence companies. We continue to sign those contracts. I recognise the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman asked for clarity on behalf of industry. We are working with our industrial partners to do that. Indeed, there are many contracts that his Government chose not to sign, which we are still working our way through to make sure that we can deliver the updated defence posture that the strategic defence review set out so clearly.

As the right hon. Gentleman will know, we are a Government who have delivered a plan to increase defence spending: there was £5 billion extra in our Budget this year, and it will reach 2.5% of our GDP by April 2027—three years earlier than anyone projected. We will achieve 3% in the next Parliament. We have made a commitment alongside our NATO allies for 3.5% on defence, as part of 5% on national security by 2035.

The right hon. Gentleman will also remember from when he was a Defence Minister—it was a wee while ago—that it is very normal to do business-as-usual budget management in-year. We are fixing the mess that his party left us in defence, but for the purpose of this statement I do not wish to make party political jibes. I wish to reinforce the cross-party support that this House can show for our friends in Ukraine. We will continue to do that, and I look forward to that further support being on show next year and every year afterwards.

I call the Chair of the Defence Committee.

I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. The final letter from the late Lance Corporal George Hooley is moving, poignant and inspirational. We will remember him.

The Defence Committee wholeheartedly supports the Government’s steadfast support for Ukraine, their approach to a just and lasting peace, and the robust security guarantees for our Ukrainian friends. Putin and Russia have illegally invaded a sovereign European nation and should pay the cost, rather than the lion’s share of the burden falling on my Slough constituents and the British taxpayer. Rather than prevaricating, when will the Government and their European allies finally use the frozen Russian assets to punish Putin and properly support our Ukrainian friends?

I thank my hon. Friend and his Committee for the work that they have done over the past 12 months in support of our service personnel and our allies, not just in Ukraine but across the world. We continue to work alongside our European partners to look at how we can use the immobilised sovereign Russian assets; indeed, we are undertaking discussions on that very topic today. There is strong support from the Prime Minister, the Chancellor and the Defence Secretary for progress on this issue, and we are seeing more progress from our European allies.

I hope that we will continue to make progress, because the case that my hon. Friend makes about Russia paying for the damage that it has caused, and about the cost that it has inflicted on the Ukrainian people, is absolutely right. We need to continue to make that case, especially as we get towards what I hope will be a peace deal that brings a just and lasting peace. It needs to be a fair peace, in which the voices of the Ukrainian people are heard very clearly.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I welcome the hon. Lady to her place on the Liberal Democrat Front Bench. I agree with her that it is important that, as we hopefully move towards a peace deal that is brokered by our American allies, the Ukrainian voice is heard loud and strong, and that a deal signals not a pause in hostilities but the end of hostilities. In order for that to happen, the Ukrainians must have their voice heard in the negotiations and be able to maintain a viable defence of their own nation in the future. The UK stands ready to support them through the coalition of the willing, the Multinational Force Ukraine and further actions.

I hope the hon. Lady will recognise that the actions we have taken on the Russian oil price cap have made a difference. My colleagues in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and in the Treasury continue to look at more methods that we can use. Indeed, a key part of our sanctions activity involves doing so alongside our allies, and we continue to build international support for those actions. That includes making sure that we can maintain our NATO commitments and our NATO unity when it comes to not only Euro-Atlantic security, but the support we offer Ukraine.

May I return to the issue of the Russian assets? I talked to members of the Ukrainian community last night, and their anxiety is that if a deal is not done quickly—[Interruption.] Sorry, did the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) want to intervene?

I talked to members of the Ukrainian community last night, and they were extremely worried about the situation. They are concerned that unless a deal is done quickly, there will be further threats not just to Ukraine but to Poland, because the Russians are amassing on the Belarusian borders. The fear is that if Trump somehow tries to impose a peace deal that eventually becomes temporary, the frozen Russian assets will be used for the next invasion of Ukraine. That is why it is so important to seal the deal now.

With regard to Abramovich, I welcome the measures taken by the Government, but there was a long period in which the City of London was used as the Russian laundromat for tax avoidance. It would be worth while the Government looking again at the Russian tax avoidance that located itself within the UK, to see whether some of those assets could be used to rebuild Ukraine.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his comments. I agree that it is important that we make progress on the seized Russian assets. Those negotiations and discussions are continuing today, and I hope that we will be able to report positive news in due course. He is right about the threat not just to Ukraine, but to our NATO allies along the eastern flank. It is for that reason that the UK has deployed forces and Typhoon jets in support of our allies. We are supporting our Estonian allies through Op Cabrit and the presence of the British Army’s forward land forces, and we will continue to do so.

I recognise what my right hon. Friend said about the importance of making sure that we can be proud of the measures that we are taking as a country to stand up against money laundering and illicit finances. We have made good progress, but my colleagues in the Treasury will continue to look at new avenues to clamp down on illicit finance. We hope that peace comes soon to Ukraine, but the threat from Russia will not end when peace comes.

I call the Father of the House.

I agree with the Minister that we have to work on a cross-party basis on this issue, because that is how we are strongest, so can we agree on the following two points? First, it would be intolerable if any peace settlement forced Ukraine to give up territory that Russia has not already conquered forcibly and if Ukraine gave up its fortress belt. It would be like stripping Czechoslovakia of Sudetenland and leaving it defenceless.

The second point is even more important. We cannot have a peace settlement through warm words alone; we must have a commitment that Ukraine’s defence is protected by the equivalent of an article 5 declaration. The only thing that will deter Putin is knowing that if he invades again, there will be war with the west and we will win. Can we unite on those two powerful points?

I thank the Father of the House for the strength he puts into his argument. We are in a new era of threat, and our approaches need to adapt. It is right that the Ukrainians are at the negotiating table and will decide the terms on which a peace deal is done, and we will continue to support them to deliver that. We are very clear that it is for Ukraine to decide its future in the negotiations.

On security guarantees, we continue to believe that the long-term future of Ukraine is within NATO, but it is for Ukraine to decide on its security alliances. It is important that, as we look towards what a possible peace might be, security guarantees exist within that framework that not only enable the deployment of western forces to help support our Ukrainian friends, but prevent Putin from pausing, regrouping and coming back for more. I welcome the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman asked his questions.

Today’s newspapers carry further coverage of attempts by Russia to influence political systems in the west. To avoid being held to account for the war in Ukraine, Russian agents are reportedly undermining financial institutions and public servants in Belgium. Following the jailing of a former Reform leader in Wales for taking bribes from Russia, does the Minister agree that the inquiry into foreign financial interference in our domestic politics has not come soon enough?

The vast majority of the seized Russian assets are held by Belgium—within its geography—which is why we are having discussions not only internationally but directly with our Belgian colleagues. I hope that progress can be made on that.

My hon. Friend is right that the threats we face from Russia are not just military threats. The sub-threshold or grey zone threats—the election interference that we see Russia perpetrating around the world, the cyber-threats and cyber-attacks against the UK and our allies, and the potential grey zone attacks on our undersea infrastructure—are all part of the increasing threat that Russia poses to our country, our values and our alliances. For that reason, it is absolutely right that the Government take steps in all those areas to look at what can be done to prevent Russian interference and to defend ourselves more strongly and better. That includes increasing defence spending, as well as other measures.

May I start by paying tribute and offering thanks to all those on the frontlines in our uniform, guarding our seas, guarding our land and guarding our air? They will be on duty for the next fortnight, when many of us will be celebrating, and will not have the chance to be with their families.

May I raise a point that I do not really want to raise, but which I am afraid is fundamentally true? The promises of defence spending are actually on the never-never—they are for after the next election. The reality, as the Minister knows very well, is that the uplift he has spoken about is actually a reallocation of money that was allocated to Ukraine and is still allocated to Ukraine. It was coming out of one budget and it is now under the defence budget. That is Treasury chicanery, not a defence uplift.

The reality is that we are not considered serious. We complain, understandably, that we are not part of President Trump’s talks, but we are not willing to put in the money or put a stake in the ground to show that we are a capable and equal player. We see what Poland is doing and what the Baltic states are doing, and we are not doing it ourselves. Until we are willing to do it ourselves, I am afraid that the Minister, and all of us here, are not being serious. We are not truly standing with Ukraine, we are not truly defending the British people, and I am afraid that the promises will come to naught.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the passion with which he puts the argument. We are increasing defence spending; there is £5 billion extra in the defence budget this year. We will have more money in our budget every year for the next 10 years. There is not a single person who has served in uniform and seen a decade of rising defence spending ahead of them. We need to spend that well, but we also need to recognise that, with increasing threats, it is not just Defence that needs to spend money well; it is the whole of Government and the whole of society that need to step up. It is not just an MOD pursuit, although we take the lead in many cases.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his thanks to the service personnel deployed around the world. For Members who have not seen it yet, the Royal Navy Christmas advert, which shows the real-life events of HMS Diamond when she was in the Red sea and what happens for our people at home and those deployed abroad, is well worth a watch.

For some Ukrainian children, this will be the fourth Christmas that they will spend in Russia, after being torn from their families by the Russian state. Others will spend their Christmas living under occupation, and many more will spend their Christmas in a military training camp, being taught to fight against their own country. Will my hon. Friend set out what recent work he has been doing with colleagues in the FCDO to make sure that those children do not find themselves on the battlefield and that they spend their next Christmas in their own home, in their own country and with their own families?

Children should never be pawns of war. May I place on record my thanks to my hon. Friend for championing this issue? There is not a Ukraine debate that goes by without her raising the issue of Ukrainian children. It is absolutely vital, and it is why, as a country, we have said that a lasting and just peace in Ukraine must include the return of all the Ukrainian children stolen by Russia. We have committed more than £2.8 million to support Ukrainian efforts to facilitate the return and reintegration of children deported by Russia. We will continue to support that effort and to make the case that stealing children is not the sign of a strong nation. It is the sign of a weak nation, and it is not something that we will support or that any decent nation around the world should back.

I welcome what the Minister said about introducing a maritime services ban on Russian liquefied natural gas; I was a little less welcoming of what he said about it being phased in over the next year. It was reported this week that UK-insured ships have transported almost half the Russian diesel exports since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Those exports are thought to have been worth more than £24 billion pounds, and UK-owned or UK-insured vessels are reported to have enabled the export of £45 billion-worth of Russian gas. Why can the Government not get on with the UK maritime services ban today?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. We have announced that we intend to introduce the maritime services ban on Russian LNG, which will restrict Russia’s ability to export globally. The reason it is being phased in is so that it can be done in lockstep with our EU friends, who are introducing equivalent restrictions. He is right to identify the issue, and the Government are right to take steps to address it. I am an impatient so-and-so, and I know that the efforts that we are making across Government are based on a similar impatience to get it done fast, but it must be done well.

I thank the Minister for his statement and send solidarity to Ukraine. As Christmas approaches, I would like to thank all who serve in our armed forces and wish them a merry Christmas, wherever they are in the world.

I want to pause and remember Lance Corporal George Hooley, who, as we heard from the Minister, has returned home to the UK. Before his passing, Lance Corporal Hooley wrote a letter to his friends and family to be opened in the event of his death, as many members of our armed forces do. If you will allow me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to share a few of his beautiful, poignant and proud words:

“If you are reading this, it means I didn’t make it home. Please don’t let that be the thing that breaks you. You know I was doing what I believed in as well as loved, with people I respected, and for reasons that matter to me, my country and democracy and freedom in this world. I was proud of what I was doing.

Don’t remember me with sadness and loss. Be proud. I went out doing what I trained to do, what I chose to do, and I had all of you in my heart the whole way.”

Rest in peace, Lance Corporal George Hooley.

I thank my hon. Friend for reading Lance Corporal George Hooley’s words into the record. I know how close to home that will hit with her, as a mother of someone serving in our armed forces, and indeed other Members across the House. We ask extraordinary things of our people. What they do and the sacrifices they make—the ultimate sacrifice in this case, but also the sacrifice at Christmas—is appreciated on the Government Benches, on the Opposition Benches and, I believe, by everyone in the United Kingdom.

May I endorse what the hon. Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) and the Minister have said about Lance Corporal George Hooley, who sounds as if he was a fine individual and a great soldier?

On 29 December, it will be the 85th anniversary of President Roosevelt’s famous fireside chat radio broadcast, in which he defined his country, which was not then at war, as the “arsenal of democracy” in support of those countries that were at war. He did not say that Churchill had no cards to play. He did not say that Adolf Hitler should be rewarded with recognition of the countries that had been occupied. By the end of the war, the Americans had seen the importance of standing in alliance with the other democracies, and when Germany was divided, they made certain that the western part of Germany was not a military vacuum. Does the Minister agree that if Ukraine is divided by force, then we democracies must make sure that western, free Ukraine is not a military vacuum either?

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the way he puts the argument. That is precisely the reason why we are working with our French colleagues on the coalition of the willing, to make sure that when peace comes, and I hope it comes soon, we will be able to support our Ukrainian friends, allowing them to remove their units from the frontline and reconstitute them up to NATO standard, because the deterrence we need in Ukraine is a stronger Ukraine—one that will stand up against any future Russian aggression. But we need to recognise that, as a leading country in NATO, we have commitments not just to our friends in Ukraine—which we will honour—but to our NATO allies along the eastern flank and elsewhere in the Euro-Atlantic. We will continue to make commitments and support those efforts as well.

The people of Ukraine are not alone, as we have heard in this House today. Their sacrifices are for their own country, but they are for us all. I am therefore very grateful for what this Government are doing in leading the way; so much more is being done to support our brethren and sisters in Ukraine. However, Russia is a threat not just to Ukraine but to all of Europe, and we have heard about the threats to this country. What can the Minister tell us about the cross-Government steps we are taking to stop interference in our democracy, attacks on our infrastructure and, indeed, attacks on our whole society?

This Government’s approach has been ever so slightly different from those of previous Governments. We have taken a different approach to revealing Russian activity, precisely because we face threats increasing. For instance, in revealing the activity of the Russian spy ship Yantar on her recent visit over some of our infrastructure, and the shining of a laser at our RAF pilots, we were deliberately calling out that behaviour, being clear about the threats that Russia poses and signalling support for our allies in doing so.

We were doing something else as well. We need to take the British people with us. Part of that is not just a whole-of-Government approach, but a whole-of-society approach. We are being clear about the threats that Russia poses to our way of life, values, laws and institutions, but also being clear that we can do something to stand up against them—every Department can. Having met the Security Minister this morning, I know that he is taking the threat seriously. We are doing more in that respect to deal with the threats that Russia poses, and there will be further announcements in the new year.

We are thinking of all Ukrainians today, particularly the around 2,500 who found sanctuary in Aberdeen; they will be spending Christmas worried about their friends and family who remain in Ukraine. According to the Defence Committee, the most effective way to ensure long-term security for Ukraine and the strongest possible European defence framework is to have strategic unity with our European allies. Will the Minister confirm the reasons behind the refusal to join the SAFE—Security Action for Europe—programme?

I thank the hon. Lady for putting on record the Ukrainians who are in the UK because they found sanctuary with families up and down the country. They will continue to receive our support.

We entered into negotiations with our European friends around SAFE in good faith. We wanted to secure a deal, but we were also clear from the start that we would not accept a deal that was not in the best interests of our taxpayers or the British defence industry. Sadly, we were not able to find a fair financial measure for inclusion. We were happy to pay our fair share, but we were not willing to pay above that.

We continue to work with our European friends, and British companies can participate in SAFE arrangements up to 35%. We will continue to work through bilateral arrangements, such as the Trinity House agreement we signed with Germany and the frigate deal with our friends in Norway, which will benefit Scotland considerably. There is more to do across Europe, and we will do continue to do it, whether we are in SAFE or not.

I welcome the Minister’s announcement that readiness levels have been revised and increased so that, if a just peace can be successfully negotiated, forces are ready to deploy to prevent future Russian aggression. Will the Minister set out to the House the extent to which the coalition of the willing is ready for such a significant deployment and commitment and—if he can comment—what force elements might be deployed first?

The coalition of the willing is ready to deploy. I am afraid that I will not be able to give the news, which Putin wants, about what units we are deploying, but the coalition of the willing has a number of elements: safe skies, which would probably be the fastest deployment of assets in terms of combat air Typhoon jets and allied jets, to secure airspace; safe seas, securing the maritime domain; and supporting the regeneration of Ukrainian forces.

We continue to work with our coalition of the willing allies around rotating readiness, so that whenever peace comes, we are able to deploy. We have UK personnel working with our friends and allies on the coalition of the willing to ensure that, if President Trump’s peace deal is successful, we are able to move immediately after that deal takes place.

Can the Minister update us on de-mining in Ukraine? Ukrainian civilians are still regularly being killed by mines or improvised explosive devices. The last time that I had the opportunity to visit Ukraine, it was with the HALO Trust, which is based in my constituency and carries out the meticulous work of removing mines. The scale of the mines is such that there remains a serious threat to the civilian population.

The right hon. Gentleman is exactly correct. Russia’s reckless use of mines across large areas of Ukraine poses a threat not just to Ukraine’s military forces, but to civilians in Ukraine and occupied Ukraine every single day. I thank him for mentioning the people in his constituency and elsewhere who undertake de-mining, and we will continue to support that effort with our Ukrainian friends. Indeed, we want to go further by supporting de-mining efforts, after peace, in the Black sea, to ensure that we clear not just mines on the land, but maritime mines, which threaten peaceful trade in the Black sea. That can be addressed when peace comes.

May I thank the Minister for reiterating the UK’s commitment to stand by Ukraine in this illegal war by Russia? This is another Christmas that many Ukrainians in the UK will be spending away from their family and their home. Will he join me in wishing them a merry Christmas, making a commitment that we will always be a safe haven for them, and thanking people, such as Viktoriya Shtanko, who are leading efforts in the UK to make sure that they have a happy Christmas?

This Christmas is a difficult time, because we tend to think of family, those people we have lost and the people we miss. Not only have many of our Ukrainian friends lost homes and family members, but there is uncertainty about their friends and family members on the frontline and those who remain in Ukraine and occupied Ukraine. I thank everyone in our communities who have welcomed in Ukrainians. We will continue to support our Ukrainian friends at home and abroad. I wish all Ukrainians a very merry Christmas and, hopefully, a peaceful new year.

I welcome the Minister’s statement and reiterate Reform’s strong support, with all parties in this House, for Ukraine, its sovereignty and its independence against the dictator Putin. The Minister knows that I have spoken frequently about using the frozen central assets, and I am encouraged by his words today, but can I urge him to go further? Ukrainian friends of mine have reinforced the strength of the negotiating leverage of such assets. This Government therefore have the opportunity to show real leadership in the coalition of the willing by committing unilaterally to using those frozen central assets.

In the spirit of Christmas, may I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for this effort? It is so important that we can, as much as possible, present a cross-party, unified voice. The steps that he has taken, especially to address the pollution of Russian bribes in his own party, are important steps forward. Hopefully, Russian bribes will never, ever again be taken by people in his party or anyone else’s.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise the issue of frozen Russian assets, and it is important that the UK moves with our international allies in this respect. That has been our approach from the start. I hope that we are nearly at the point where progress can be made. He is right to say just how important it is to use those assets as leverage in peace, as well as to use the value of those assets, and the interest from them, to support Ukraine in the fight against Putin’s illegal invasion.

May I start by associating myself with the remarks from the hon. Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) regarding the loss of Lance Corporal Hooley this Christmas? Given the situation in Ukraine and the possibility of a Russian redeployment and reconstitution of its forces in the event of any peace settlement, the Schwerpunkt of any future Russian belligerence may be more difficult to fix than to strike. We clearly require some sort of continuous on-land deterrent to ensure that we maximise our sensor-to-effector opportunities across all domains, including space. What progress has he made in digitising our kill chain, developing our AI solution, getting inside Russia’s OODA—observe, orient, decide, act—loop, and ensuring the effectiveness of the eastern flank deterrence line? When will we see a tangible output?

I fear there will be more parliamentary questions based on that question coming at me very soon. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise the integrated digital targeting web as a key part of our deterrence activity. The SDR was clear that we are moving to a situation, in a digitised battlefield, where any target must be able to be in the same decision-making process as any sensor to detect it, and any effector to prosecute it. We are piecing that together.

The early steps in the digital targeting web have been taken, with money being spent to develop the concept further. That will be reinforced in the defence investment plan. By using that technology, we hope to increase the lethality of our forces by having a greater flexibility in how we target and detect adversaries—that makes our Army, Air Force and Navy much stronger—and integrating space and cyber facilities in that combined effort. That is a good part of the SDR, and we are making progress on it.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House today on this last day of Parliament before Christmas, which keeps Ukraine at the top of the political agenda, which is where it must be. I want to endorse thoroughly every word uttered by my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) in his response to the Minister’s statement, as well as the words of my right hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat). I make no apology for pressuring the Government to spend more on defence, and I know that secretly, in his heart, the Minister agrees with me. Will he think about coming back to the House early in the new year with a debate and a motion on a three-line Whip, so that we can thoroughly debate these matters with a much fuller House than we have this afternoon? That will enable us to lead the conversation that he so ably talks about.

I have no doubt in my mind that the hon. Gentleman, and indeed many of my hon. Friends sitting behind me, will also be making the case for defence. Both the Minister for the Armed Forces and myself, as well as the Defence Secretary and the Minister for Veterans and People, value the focus put on defence by cross-party debates. There will be opportunities in the new year to look at the defence investment plan and at how we deploy the increased defence spending that we have been allocated. In doing so, we must be mindful of how we implement the strategic defence review, which is the key strategic document that we are seeking to implement as a Government; it sets out how we will increase lethality of our forces and how we will renew our forces, retiring old gear and bringing on new technologies in order to do so. More debates on defence in this House are very welcome indeed.

I thank the Minister for his statement, and for reminding us of the commitment of the £1.6 billion deal announced this March for 5,000 lightweight air defence missiles, which supports 700 jobs at Thales in Belfast, and indeed across the Province. This Government and this Minister are committing themselves, and I thank them for that.

The picture on the front page of The Times today shows two soldiers who had been on the front for 130 days. They look tired—they look like they need a break. They have now been sent to the rear to have a chance to recuperate. While their faces are tired, their eyes tell the real story: they show their courage and commitment. What has been done to ensure that all medical help and assistance is available to help the injured, both in mind and body, and to get them reinvigorated so that they can go back and continue to stand for Ukrainians at the front?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising the lightweight multirole missile contract that we secured earlier this year in support of the production facility in Belfast. Defence is an engine for growth, and we can use not only the increased spending on our defence, but that in support of our friends in Ukraine to create more good, well-paid and decent jobs in every part of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right; my sense of many Ukrainian soldiers on the front is that they are tired but undefeated. The courage that we see from them, and their innovative spirit in using new technologies to defend their country and their people against this illegal attack, should give us all courage and pride; it will continue to do so. I encourage the hon. Gentleman to look at Project Renovator, which is how we are supporting Ukrainian service personnel to recuperate and then get back on the frontline. As well as supporting that effort, we are providing those fighting forces with the equipment and innovative new technology that they need, especially in drones and air defence missiles, to ensure that we can keep Ukraine in the fight, as well as putting it in the best possible position at the negotiating table.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I will take it provided that it pertains to the statement we have just had.

Absolutely; it does pertain to the statement. We had been hoping for a Christmas present in the form of a defence investment plan. The Minister has told the House that the Government are working, in his words, flat out—

Order. This is not a point of order.

It is—it is about when it will be delivered.

The right hon. Gentleman is seeking to extend the debate we have just had on a separate matter. He will know that that is not a point of order, and it is not a matter for the Chair whether the MOD is going to bring forward—

To the House.

It is simply not a matter for the Chair. It does not pertain to the statement.