POLITICIANS in Swindon have backed the Prime Minister’s stance against Russia following the nerve agent attack in Salisbury.

South Swindon MP Robert Buckland fully supported Theresa May when she presented her case in Parliament on Wednesday.

Mr Buckland, who also holds the office of solicitor general, spoke defiantly, stressing Britain’s “commitment to the non-use of chemical weapons”.

He said: “The prime minister took strong but considered action in response to the unlawful use of force by another state right here in Wiltshire.

“Britain is a country which abides by the rule of law and we have looked closely at the evidence before taking action.”

He made clear Britain’s desire to “work closely with other countries, taking action to isolate those responsible”.

But Mrs May’s speech appeared to cause a rift in the Labour Party. Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s reaction to the speech sparked a row, as his spokesman, Seumas Milne, questioned the evidence that Moscow was behind the attack.

A report in The Guardian stated: “A string of Labour backbenchers, including Yvette Cooper, Ben Bradshaw and Hilary Benn, intervened to offer their backing to May, in what appeared to be pointed responses to Corbyn’s stance.”

The move prompted Sarah Church, Labour’s parliamentary candidate for South Swindon, to declare her support for the government’s position.

She said: “An attack with a nerve agent on UK soil cannot be tolerated. The evidence seems clear enough to demand co-operation from Russia.

“The UK government’s robust response, along with all of our international allies, is appropriate and we must not back down.”

She added: “For too long, Russian money has had too much influence here, so, along with diplomatic expulsions and the dismantling of Russian intelligence capability, the UK version of the Magnitsky Act is now needed.

“We must act in a unified, strong and proportionate manner to protect UK citizens.”

Outlining the government’s position, after summing up all the available evidence, Mrs May said: “There are only two plausible explanations for what happened in Salisbury on March 4.

“Either this was a direct act by the Russian state against our country, or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.”

As evidence, she cited, among other things, Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and Russia’s capability of producing the chemical agent in question.

She called it a “reckless and despicable act” that had led to former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, remaining in intensive care.