more could the us be doing. it is a long range missile fired from lunches, with a much longer range than other weapons, the united states has been reluctant to send that for fear of provoking the russians and making it appear that the us is striking the russian homeland. but in one sense, these are distractions. what the ukrainians need are just large numbers of more mundane elements of support. artillery ammunition. artillery pieces, trucks, engineering equipment. and the like, and it is critical that the flow of all of those relatively mundane items continue because without them, ukraine would be able to continue with its resistance. with its resistance. mark cancian, thank ou with its resistance. mark cancian, thank you very with its resistance. mark cancian, thank you very much with its resistance. mark cancian, thank you very much for - with its resistance. mark cancian, thank you very much forjoining i with its resistance. mark cancian, l thank you very much forjoining us. t
denials of targeting its bases. also, unusually, it mentioned yevgeny prigozhin by name so that on state tv, and it also suggests that the kremlin is really concerned about what you have any prigozhin may be doing. yevgeny prigozhin may be doing. doing. yevgeny prigozhin may be doinu. , , doing. yevgeny prigozhin may bedoinu. , , be doing. and briefly if you don t mind. be doing. and briefly if you don t mind, you be doing. and briefly if you don t mind, you mention . be doing. and briefly if you - don t mind, you mention some of this is unusual, particularly, for example, mentioning prigozhin by name. a significant do you think this moment could be?- significant do you think this moment could be? there is a lot of speculation moment could be? there is a lot of speculation about moment could be? there is a lot of speculation about whether - of speculation about whether this is real because people who have been watching russia for years, they used various games of smok
through, and penny. we not voted against it, so it has gone through, and penny. not voted against it, so it has gone through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports it through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports it or through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports it or not. - through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports it or not. i - through, and penny. we do not know whether he supports it or not. i did - whether he supports it or not. i did not know if whether he supports it or not. i did not know if i whether he supports it or not. i did not know if i would whether he supports it or not. i did not know if i would abstain or vote against not know if i would abstain or vote against it. not know if i would abstain or vote against it. i not know if i would abstain or vote against it, i went in with an open mind, against it, i went in with an open mind, penny spoke with great e
conservative mp bob seeley voted to support the privileges committee report, as did liberal democrat mp layla moran, chair of the all party parliamentary group on coronavirus. is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is runnina is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is running the is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is running the country, is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is running the country, as is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is running the country, as it - is rishi sunak in hiding? no, he is running the country, as it should l running the country, as it should be doing running the country, as it should be doinu. ~ . ., running the country, as it should be doinu. a ., running the country, as it should be doinu. m . , ., doing. michael gove said she would abstain, doing. michael gove said she would abstain. any doing. michael gove said she would abstain, any more doing. michael gove said she would abstain, any more than doing. michael gove said she would abstain, any more than and - d
no, it s not. what you re doing is saying you will only ban new oil and gas licences from the point at which you win an election, if you win it. i can see the question you re asking. are we going to rescind existing licences? we re not going to do that. i ll tell you why we re not going to rescind existing licences. first of all, it s the wrong thing to do because it sends the wrong signal to investors all over the world. but secondly and very pertinently it would mean we have to pay billions in compensation to the very oil and gas companies that have been making record profits. then i d be on your programme, victoria, and you d be saying, ed, why is the priority to spend billions in compensation for revoking these licences? why does that make sense to the taxpayer? and the answer is, it doesn t. ed miliband, thank you very much for talking to newsnight. ed miliband speaking to me from labour s green energy launch in edinburgh. who should pay for the reconstruction of ukraine? russia,