Russian Influence on UK Politics and Democracy

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 9th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Pritchard. I hope that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) enjoyed the email that I sent him this afternoon.

Carl von Clausewitz described war as a continuation of politics by other means. In the Kremlin, the reverse is true and every lever of statehood is a machine of war. Vladimir Putin has been prosecuting that war against the United Kingdom and our allies for 26 years—whether or not we understand that. NATO and the European Union are two major barriers to Putin’s ambition for expansion and the UK is a crucial partner to both.

In November 2025, Nathan Gill, Reform UK’s erstwhile leader in Wales, was convicted of taking Russian bribes in return for favourable statements in the European Parliament. The hon. Member for Clacton, and leader of Reform UK, described his once close associate as a “bad apple”, but I suspect that the real rot is at the heart of the orchard.

The hon. Member for Clacton also made pro-Kremlin statements as a Member of the European Parliament, most notably in 2014, the year that Russia first invaded Ukraine, when he spoke of Europe poking

“the Russian bear with a stick”.

The previous year, he had met the Russian ambassador, Alexander Yakovenko, at the Russian embassy in London. He later denied that that meeting took place, but a photograph of the pair betrays the falsehood.

Arron Banks also met Yakovenko on at least four occasions between 2015 and 2016, a period within which he donated at least £8 million to a campaign to leave the European Union. He has subsequently given conflicting accounts as to the origin of that donation. Banks is known to have explored the possibility of raising foreign donations through an email copied to Steve Bannon in 2015, and in 2025, Reform UK received a donation of £9 million from the co-owner of cryptocurrency Tether, Christopher Harborne. Tether is understood by the National Crime Agency to be used by the Kremlin to launder its money, evading international sanctions and keeping its war machine running.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

My hon. and gallant Friend is right to highlight the threat from hostile states such as Russia and most importantly from individuals with Russian links. That is exactly why I introduced a private Member’s Bill last year to cap political donations and close the loopholes that allow foreign-linked dark and dirty money to flow into our politics. Does my hon. Friend agree that wealthy individuals with opaque international links can exert damaging influence on our democracy, particularly when our political finance rules still allow very large donations—including crypto donations—with limited scrutiny?

[Cameron Thomas]

I absolutely agree, and I look forward to the Rycroft review hopefully making some recommendations along those very lines.

The case of Bradshaw and others v. the United Kingdom at the European Court of Human Rights judged in 2025 that the UK’s decision to leave the European Union was subject to Russian interference, but neither MI5 nor MI6 has ever properly explained its dereliction of duty in failing to inform Parliament of that activity. Last year, I asked the Security Minister to release the full, unredacted Russia report, which Prime Minister Boris Johnson suppressed in 2019 against the advice of those security services. The Minister declined, but did not elaborate on his reasoning.

I recalled that interaction last week, after Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein were linked to Putin’s friend, oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Mandelson was also a non-executive director at the Russian company Sistema. Last week, the leader of the Liberal Democrats called for a full inquiry into Mandelson’s links to Russia. That is the same inquiry that the petitioners are asking for.

Ours is an era in which war rages in Europe, the great partnerships of NATO and the European Union have been ruptured, and Russian hybrid warfare has targeted every aspect of UK statehood, from the Ministry of Defence to the NHS and the BBC. Disinformation has for years been interwoven with news to undermine public trust in UK politics—disinformation that now feeds artificial intelligence algorithms distorting the truth that will inform tomorrow.

I have scratched the surface, but there is simply too little time, in any number of Back-Bench debates, to lay out the case for this inquiry. This issue transcends political allegiance. The breadth and depth of Russian influence is so vast and so dangerous to our democracy that no single political party has either the credibility or capacity to fully investigate it. Only a judge-led statutory public inquiry will suffice. The Government have the responsibility to deliver; the future of our democracy requires that they do so.

US Department of Justice Release of Files

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

The Government stand ready to work with the appropriate authorities in the House of Lords to update its procedures, and as I informed this House, we have written to them today to start that process. We hope to move as quickly as possible.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

I want to focus on the victims—the children and young girls who were trafficked. Will the Government confirm that any UK-linked offences will be fully investigated, that all evidence will be acted upon, and that anyone implicated, whatever their status, will be pursued with the full force of the law to ensure that victims and survivors receive the justice and support they deserve?

[Darren Jones]

The hon. Lady is right that the victims of Jeffrey Epstein need to be at the centre of all our attention. The Government will, of course, co-operate with any investigations that take place. As we have said repeatedly, anybody with any information should make themselves available to investigators, whether here or overseas.

Oral Answers to Questions

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Commons Chamber

The Minister for Women and Equalities was asked—

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

1. If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of her timetable for bringing forward legislative proposals to ban conversion practices on affected people.

[Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

12. What steps she is taking to ban conversion practices.

[The Minister for Equalities (Olivia Bailey)]

Conversion practices are abuse, they cause long-lasting harm, and they have no place in our society. We will bring our comprehensive, trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices before the House as soon as possible.

[Manuela Perteghella]

LGBTQ rights campaigners have warned that the Government’s continued delay on banning conversion practices is dangerous and leaves vulnerable people without protection. Every month of delay leaves people exposed to practices that the Government themselves have said are abusive. Will the Minister now set out a clear timeline and give a firm commitment that the Government will not drag their heels on this any longer?

[Olivia Bailey]

As I have just said, conversion practices are abusive and we will ban them. All LGBT people deserve to live freely and without fear, shame or discrimination. This legislation is a priority for the Government, as set out in the King’s Speech.

--- Later in debate ---

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

This Government are reinforcing our commitment to championing the rights of disabled people. This month we celebrate Disability History Month, and we marked the International Day of Persons with Disabilities last week. This year also marks the 30th anniversary of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. We will continue our work to boost opportunities for disabled people, including by developing our plan for disability, which will outline our priorities for removing barriers faced by disabled people.

[Manuela Perteghella]

Women in rural areas often have to travel long distances to reach a refuge, police station or basic support services. What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the impact that travelling those long distances has on the safety of victims of domestic abuse, and what action is being taken to close the rural support gap?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I do recognise that challenge. That is why in developing our violence against women and girls strategy we heard from victims in rural areas to understand what more is needed to ensure that they can access the services and support that they need.

Digital ID

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 8th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)]

This is a watershed moment for our country, and not a good one. The argument for digital ID is that it will help tackle illegal working, but sadly the evidence does not stack up. Across Europe, nations with long-standing ID card systems—Germany, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Greece—have not seen reductions in irregular migration as a result of ID cards. In fact, some have larger shadow economies than our own. Estonia, the poster child for digital ID, actually has a bigger underground economy than Britain. Assuming that this new system will somehow suddenly make rogue employers obey the law, when they have ignored the paper checks for some time, is for the birds.

That argument aside, the real fear here is that we will be building an infrastructure that can follow us, link our most sensitive information and expand state control over all our lives. The Minister must understand why people are concerned. This policy does not arrive in a vacuum. It sits alongside a worrying pattern: the accelerated roll-out of facial recognition, attempts to weaken end-to-end encryption, and data laws that strip away privacy protections.

We must remember that Britain has no constitutional right to privacy. Parliament can, in a single vote, grant or remove protections that people in other democracies take for granted. When we think of building a nationwide ID system capable of linking health records, education data, housing history and even information about crimes that people have suffered, we should stop, because once that architecture exists, any future Government could misuse it, and we would have very little power to stop them.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

My constituents in Stratford-on-Avon are deeply concerned as well. Does the hon. Member agree that if millions of people need to rely on a Government-built identity tool to access work and services, the risks of data and privacy breaches and of errors will be considerable?

UK-EU Summit

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. We will work as quickly as we can on that issue, because, whichever way people voted, they did not vote to stop creatives and sportspeople crossing national boundaries to showcase their talent—in whatever way that may be—so we do need to resolve it.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

The impact of the Creative Europe programme between 2014 and 2019 on the UK arts, film, publishing and other creative sectors was hugely beneficial, and not just for practitioners and organisations but for the country as a whole. Will the Government look into the possibility of participating again in this creative programme to further boost the economic potential of our creative industries?

[The Prime Minister]

We set out yesterday the areas where we had reached agreement. We will now have annual summits, but we will approach that matter on a value-for-money basis.

European Union: UK Membership

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 24th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening this debate and all those who signed the petition.

I will start by declaring an interest: I am a product of the European Union project—or the European Community, as it was called when I came to the UK at the age of 19 as a young student from Italy, just after John Major’s Government signed the Maastricht treaty. I am immensely proud to stand here today to represent my wonderful constituency of Stratford-on-Avon.

I worked as a lecturer for many years. I saw at first hand the importance of collaborative research projects with our colleagues in EU universities, as well as the positive impact of Horizon and of Erasmus+, which is the biggest programme of youth opportunities in the world.

[Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)]

In Sheffield Central we have two large universities. The UK having left the European Union has had an impact on not only students coming to the UK, but the financial sustainability of universities. Does the hon. Member agree that the Turing and Erasmus schemes do not go far enough? To support our universities with more students from the EU, we should encourage a stronger relationship—better than Turing—perhaps through a youth mobility scheme.

[Manuela Perteghella]

I fully agree with the hon. Member. Turing is not the same as Erasmus, because it is not reciprocal. That is one of the things that limits the opportunities for our students. Erasmus+ is not just about university exchanges; it is a programme that includes opportunities for our disadvantaged young people. Joining Erasmus+ would allow those young people in disadvantaged areas to have better life opportunities through exchanges, volunteering, training and school links.

Brexit has brought nothing but barriers for my constituents and for people across the United Kingdom. Small businesses, including plant and horticultural businesses, are drowning in red tape and incurring new taxes and expenses. Farmers have been undercut by damaging trade deals and the ending of the sustainable farming incentives that were a key part of the post-Brexit payment scheme that replaced EU subsidies.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not only vets and farmers who are extremely proud that we have some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world, but the British public? We should not compromise those farming standards and any trade deals that may occur in the future should not undermine them either.

[Manuela Perteghella]

Absolutely. The Government need to stand up for our British farmers, and that includes during the negotiation of trade deals—which, by the way, should be brought to Parliament to be fully scrutinised.

Young people have lost opportunities to study, live, travel, work and fall in love—as I myself did many years ago. Our creative industries, once thriving on European collaboration, now face restrictions and uncertainty, with artists, musicians and performers unable to tour their own continent. A priority must be not only to rejoin Erasmus+ but to create a youth mobility scheme, as many Members have discussed today.

We must have a credible roadmap to rebuild trust and ties with our European neighbours. We must start by deepening co-operation on climate, research, security and education, and we must then negotiate a new trade deal that includes a customs union to bring down the barriers holding our economy back. Ultimately, as Liberal Democrats, we want to rejoin the single market and restore the freedoms that our constituents deserve.

However, this is not just about trade; it is about values, opportunities, who we are and the role we choose to play in the world. With Trump and Putin now both a threat to our security, as already mentioned by my hon. Friends and other hon. Members, we must stand shoulder to shoulder with our friends in the European Union. As Europe rises to defend peace and democracy in the free world, the UK must not be a bystander. We must lead from the front, working with our European friends and allies to strengthen our shared economic prosperity and national security.

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

I thank all Members for their moving contributions, especially those who have advocated for constituents impacted by this terrible injustice and shared their stories. I welcome the pledge to deliver this important payment scheme swiftly. However, I urge the Minister to look at the losses of those family members who provided care. In many cases, including that of my constituent Debra, who cared for many years for her husband Barrie, bereaved partners and family carers gave up careers, sacrificing pensions and facing many additional costs. Concerns about the care award have been expressed by organisations such as Tainted Blood, which was mentioned earlier. A just care award must take all those factors into account. Will the Minister ensure fair care costs for the bereaved?