Russian Influence on UK Politics and Democracy

Claire Young Excerpts

Monday 9th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I thank the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for setting out the issues so clearly.

Protecting democracy must be a national security priority for all of us in this place. Many of us across the country recognised that by signing the petition, including 208 from my Thornbury and Yate constituency. Over recent years, these concerned citizens have watched Russian interference in democracies across the world—in the United States, across Europe, and here in the United Kingdom—and now they are demanding answers.

The petition calls for an inquiry into the depth and breadth of possible Russian influence in our country. Although in December last year the Government launched an independent review of foreign interference, led by Philip Rycroft, that is not enough. I welcome any scrutiny of foreign interference, but the review falls short on the transparency and information that the public deserve. We need a thorough and independent inquiry to understand fully the extent of foreign interference in the UK’s political system.

Parliament’s Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy previously warned that the UK has faced a sustained pattern of attempted interference from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. That assessment was reinforced by the Government’s 2025 strategic defence review, which concluded that the UK is subject to daily hostile activity, ranging from espionage and cyber-attacks to manipulation of information. The review called Russia an immediate and pressing threat.

Despite that recognition of Russian influence in the UK, successive Governments have failed to act decisively to protect our democratic process. The threats are real and documented: Russian money has flowed into UK politics; foreign oligarchs have bought property and influence; Chinese surveillance operations target our institutions; and, as has been mentioned repeatedly, Nathan Gill, the former leader of Reform UK in Wales, was jailed for accepting bribes from a pro-Kremlin operative to make pro-Russian speeches and statements. That is utterly shocking.

That is why, following Gill’s conviction, my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are calling on the Intelligence and Security Committee to launch a new probe to investigate Russian interference in British politics. The investigation should look into potential ties between other members of Reform UK and Russia, which has been a recurring concern in the debate. The Reform UK leader, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), was paid to appear on “Russia Today” until it was banned in the UK, and he once declared that Putin was the world leader he admired the most.

We must move with urgency. The inquiry should be completed and laid before Parliament before the next general election, avoiding a repeat of the last Russia report, which the Conservative party shamefully suppressed until after the country went to the polls. Voters deserve to know about threats to our democracy before they cast their ballots, not after. This is not about one bad apple; it is about systematic failures and how we protect our democracy, given how successive Administrations have failed to address fundamental weaknesses.

We hope that we will soon have the opportunity to tackle these weaknesses through an elections Bill. The Liberal Democrats believe that the Bill must include a comprehensive ban on cryptocurrency donations to political parties, building on the policy paper that the Government published last year, which proposed tighter rules on political donations. Crypto creates the perfect vehicle for hostile states and foreign oligarchs to funnel money into British politics while evading scrutiny.

Transparency International UK has warned that the anonymity that can come with these donations provides a “backdoor for foreign interference”. Analysis from Spotlight on Corruption shows that only three parties have indicated that they will accept cryptocurrency donations: Reform UK, the Homeland party and the Other party. Reform UK even has a dedicated page for cryptocurrency donations.

The elections Bill must cap political donations to stop foreign oligarchs from interfering. It must also ensure transparency in political advertising and prevent foreign and dark money from influencing UK elections. Past loopholes have allowed opaque and corrupt funding of political parties, enabling foreign money to distort British politics. Transparency International has said that a foreign interference review is “welcome”, but that donation caps are

“the only way to break the stranglehold of big money over British politics”.

[Cameron Thomas]

The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) has described a gentleman, George Cottrell, as “like a son” to him, despite that individual being a convicted money launderer. Does my hon. Friend share my suspicion? What does she make of the potential connection between money laundering and cryptocurrency?

[Claire Young]

It is extremely concerning, and that is why we would ban cryptocurrency donations. Alongside the new elections Bill, we must address the issues that the previous Conservative Government created and restore the independence of the Electoral Commission, as it had pre-2022. We must also ensure that the commission has real enforcement powers and the resources it needs to deploy them. As others have mentioned, we must also reform our electoral system. We must take a robust stance towards hostile states, such as China and Russia, and recommit to international partnerships that promote democracy and stability, including working with European and other democratic allies to co-ordinate our response to Russian interference.

The Government hold a substantial majority in the House, so they can push through legislation rapidly when they choose to. Few things can be more urgent than protecting our democracy. We call for a wide-ranging and properly funded public inquiry into potential Russian interference, including in the 2016 EU referendum, with the report to be published as soon as possible. A public inquiry with the power to compel witnesses to appear and documents to be released is the only way to get to the bottom of these serious allegations. Transparency must be prioritised.

[Phil Brickell]

The hon. Lady is making a good point about foreign interference and money in politics. Could she confirm today whether she has submitted her thoughts to the Rycroft review, which is under way at this time?

[Claire Young]

I have not, but there is still time.

This issue is about more than the failures and corruption revealed in the Nathan Gill case; it is about a system that has long been unfit for purpose and establishments that want to keep things the way they are because that suits their interests. Foreign states are now looking to exploit the situation, with potentially catastrophic outcomes. There is a danger that citizens will stop believing that their vote matters at all. We should use the situation to drive the changes that our country needs, that trust in politics demands, and that all our constituents deserve. I urge the Minister to announce an inquiry today. The threat to British democracy from foreign interference is clear and present, and must be addressed urgently.

US Department of Justice Release of Files

Claire Young Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

As far as I am aware, no Member of this House had access to the information recently published by the United States Department for Justice, or to the documents that were released at the time the Prime Minister sacked the ambassador to the United States. The Prime Minister has previously been very clear to the House that had he had access to that information, he would not have appointed him in the first place.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

The Minister indicated that Mandelson assured the Prime Minister that his relationship with Epstein was of a different nature. Can he explain what sort of relationship with a convicted paedophile would be acceptable in that role? Will the Prime Minister come back to the House to make a specific statement on the advice he received regarding Mandelson’s conduct?

[Darren Jones]

The information that became available in September that led to the sacking of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States made it clear for the first time, to all of us and to the Prime Minister, that Peter Mandelson not only remained a friend of Jeffrey Epstein following his conviction but had actively mentored and encouraged him on how to challenge that conviction and push back against it. That was one example —there is now a list of examples—of how the depth and extent of the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Mandelson, following Jeffrey Epstein’s conviction, was unacceptable. If the Prime Minister had known that at the time Peter Mandelson was being considered to be ambassador to the United States, he would not have appointed him, and as soon as the Prime Minister became aware of that information, he sacked him.

Digital ID

Claire Young Excerpts

Monday 8th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. Some 4,497 of my constituents signed the petition, and I thank the many who took the time to write to me to explain their concerns. They believe that a mandatory digital ID threatens our right to privacy while doing nothing to address the Government’s stated aims of immigration enforcement. The huge response to the petition should give the Government pause for thought. It is not too late to listen to the concerns and to think again.

We operate in a world in which ownership, control and manipulation of data is central to our lives. A real concern is that mission creep will lead to more and more online actions requiring a check, creating a digital treasure trove about each and every one of us that could be misused by the state and other actors. As one constituent put it:

“Do we want every single thing we attempt to do to require a check that ‘yes, you are a British citizen, let me just link this to you as well’?”

Many constituents pointed out that documentation is already required to work legally, but that is flouted by those operating in the dark economy. My constituents do not believe that a new ID system will solve the issue. They see it as a distraction or a diversion of money and effort from the real solution, which is better investment in enforcement. I agree: an ID scheme would cost billions, which is money that could be better spent on processing centres to clear the asylum backlog. That would do far more to restore public trust in the immigration system, if that is the issue, and still leave money to fix the public services so damaged by the previous Conservative Government.

My constituents are also concerned about the safety of our data, especially with a rushed implementation. If we create a platform that stores millions of people’s personal ID, we create a target for those who would illegally access and misuse that data. One constituent urged me to vote against digital IDs until the Government can

“show that the data of its citizens, who it claims to represent, will be safe”.

I doubt that any such guarantee will be forthcoming.

Many were concerned that the work would be outsourced to a third-party company. When we interact with a commercial service, we make a choice; mandatory ID would give up that choice. With more time, I could talk about the worries for the digitally excluded, who already face higher costs for commercial services. Will they now also miss out on Government support and services?

Digital tools should empower individuals, not give Government more control. A mandatory ID scheme in which people have no choice is totally at odds with Britain’s long history as a liberal democracy.

G20 and Ukraine

Claire Young Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Will my hon. Friend please pass a message back to them to say, “Thank you for raising this”? It is important that they have done so. The fact that they raised it with him means that it has now been raised through him on the Floor of this House, so they are directly inputting into our democracy and accountability. I assure them that we are working with partners to bring about an end to the appalling situation in Sudan. It has been the biggest humanitarian crisis in the world not just in recent days and weeks, but for a very long time—it is simply worse and more intense. Will he reassure the students that we are doing everything we can with partners to bring an end to this awful situation and thank them for their input?

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

The Prime Minister referred to Putin’s barbaric attacks on civilian energy infrastructure. What discussions has he had with his G20 counterparts about learning from Ukraine’s experience to protect energy supplies and infrastructure from hostile Russian action?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. The attacks on energy supplies are intended to inflict damage on civilians in Ukraine, as they do on a regular basis, particularly as we go into the winter. We are doing two things: we are working with the Ukrainians on what more support we can give them to safeguard their energy supplies, and of course with allies we are looking at whether there are any issues we need to address in relation to any vulnerabilities we may have.

Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements

Claire Young Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Ward]

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying, the Prime Minister said yesterday, and the Security Minister said on Monday.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

Notwithstanding the decision to drop this case, it is clear that China is trying to undermine our democracy. Will the Government include all Chinese officials, Hong Kong special administrative region officials and Chinese Communist party-linked organisations on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme?

[Chris Ward]

I am afraid that I am not across the specific of that in my brief, so I will get back to the hon. Lady.

Oral Answers to Questions

Claire Young Excerpts

Wednesday 5th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

For far too long, crimes such as shoplifting have been written off as “low level.” That is wrong; such crimes are devastating. The Conservative party left us with rising crime and effectively told the police to ignore shoplifting of under £200-worth of goods. We have got rid of that shoplifters’ charter, and we are working hard to ensure that we take a grip where they lost control.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

Q7. Following the earlier question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), I want to raise an equally troubling case. My constituent retired from the police force to care for his wife, working a part-time job to help pay the bills. As his earnings were not consistent, there were times when he was above the carer’s allowance threshold, causing later payments to be withheld. He is now owed thousands of pounds, and recently he was diagnosed with grade 4 glioblastoma, which has made the situation even more serious. Will the Prime Minister agree to look at the situation and ensure that the Department for Work and Pensions supports rather than penalises carers?

[The Prime Minister]

Again, we have obviously set up the independent review into exactly what happened in those cases, which was the right thing to do. We will look at individual circumstances, so if the hon. Member is willing to pass the details to me, we will look at them.

Storm Darragh

Claire Young Excerpts

Tuesday 10th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

I have been very concerned about this issue, particularly as part of our work on resilience looking at who may be affected, including vulnerable people and those who may become vulnerable as a result of extreme weather. Local resilience forums have also been looking into this issue. We are working closely with Welsh local authorities and the Welsh Government on how these issues can be addressed.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

Storm Darragh is the second serious storm to hit my Thornbury and Yate constituency in recent weeks; it came soon after Storm Bert, which caused serious flooding disruption. I thank everyone involved in the response. These storms are not going away; owing to the impacts of climate change, they are likely to get worse. We need a clear framework for local authorities, so that they know when they will get support and what that support will be. Can the Minister please provide some clarity on that?

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

We work very closely with the devolved Administrations, local resilience authorities and emergency responders regularly on how we can address this issue. The UK Resilience Academy will be launched in April next year, and it will be a great way for us to look at the lessons learned and at how we can strengthen our responses to such issues.