Asked whether the Secretary of State agrees with the Defence Committee’s recommendation for increased defence spending to ensure that Britain has the capabilities needed to be taken seriously on the global stage.

Inquired about steps being taken by the government to address Turkey's concerns, ensuring Finland and Sweden’s applications for NATO membership are successful.

Expressed appreciation for the Secretary of State's leadership during the current crisis and questioned whether issues related to logistics and transport resilience would be addressed at the upcoming Madrid summit.

Suggested that a defence and security treaty between the UK and EU could complement NATO’s efforts, while also referencing previous policy decisions regarding military bases in Germany.

Questioned why the Secretary of State did not clarify SNP's stance on NATO, mentioned a strategic error in pulling British Army out of Germany and inquired about progress in reinstating access to bases closer to potential theatres of operations.

Asserted that Sweden and Finland's applications for NATO membership should be successful, emphasising the importance of supporting democratically governed nations with military capabilities.

Paid tribute to British armed forces, emphasised Labour's support for NATO, criticised government’s emphasis on Indo-Pacific tilt over Europe. Highlighted the importance of military assistance to Ukraine, called for reform in defence procurement system.

Discussed the historical context of NATO formation, emphasising the role of neutral states like Finland and Sweden joining NATO to prevent occupation. Advocated for maintaining a full range of military preparedness due to unpredictable future threats and suggested increasing defence spending to at least 3% of GDP.

McDonald commended the Secretary of State's opening speech and highlighted NATO as one of the main pillars of Euro-Atlantic security. He emphasised the importance of a comprehensive defence and security treaty with the European Union, particularly for Britain’s position post-Brexit. McDonald supported Sweden and Finland joining NATO but expressed concern over the concept of a 'global NATO' mentioned by the Foreign Secretary. He advocated for resilience, emerging technologies, and eastern flank enhancement in future strategic concepts, while also highlighting the need to rebuild Ukraine.

Mr Jenkin criticised the Scottish National Party's stance on nuclear weapons, highlighting that Scotland hosts Britain's nuclear deterrent at Faslane. He referenced an article stating that 58% of Scots want to retain this capability while only 20% wish to remove it. Mr Jenkin argued against the notion that NATO has failed due to the situation in Ukraine, emphasising its success in maintaining peace and stability in Europe through collective security and nuclear deterrence. He noted Russia's failure in conducting effective military operations despite having more extensive equipment compared to Western forces and stressed the importance of a strong response to Russian escalation threats. Mr Jenkin concluded by underscoring the global significance of ensuring Ukraine’s victory.

During an intervention, Mr McDonald responded to Bernard Jenkin's comments about Scotland hosting nuclear weapons and argued that Scottish people consistently elect Members who oppose the presence of such weaponry in their country.

Thanked members of the armed forces and NATO partners for their work in keeping the UK safe. Emphasised the need to protect democratic values, rule-based order, and freedom of speech against Russian aggression. He criticised instant solutions proposed by armchair generals and stressed the importance of a sombre look at the lessons from Ukraine before increasing defence expenditure. Called on the Treasury to fund support for Ukrainian armed forces from special reserves rather than reducing the defence budget. Raised concerns about the threat of invasion in former Soviet republics like Latvia and Estonia, suggesting that NATO needs unity against Russian aggression, including investment and willingness to endure pain.

Anderson acknowledges his respect for colleagues on different committees and the importance of NATO. He discusses his personal experience with NATO operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, and elsewhere, emphasising the seriousness other nations take towards NATO's actions. He notes that the current military build-up along Russia’s borders is unprecedented since WWII. Anderson expresses pride in UK leadership regarding Ukraine and supports the integrated review for its focus on warfare preparation and cooperation with NATO allies. However, he cautions against mistaking long-term risks for immediate threats and emphasises the need to balance numbers with lethality and agility. He suggests exploring permanent presence strategies rather than rotational deployments.

Mr Wayne David emphasised the long-term implications of Vladimir Putin's challenge to Ukraine and the rules-based international order. He highlighted concerns over Russia's advance in southern Ukraine towards Odesa and its potential destabilising effects on Moldova, NATO, and the European Union. Mr David also discussed lessons learned from Finland and Sweden, which have applied for NATO membership due to the war in Ukraine. Furthermore, he addressed Germany’s significant shift in defence spending policy, including a €100 billion increase and reaching 2% of GDP towards defence expenditure. He called for reversing cuts to the UK's armed forces, especially the Army, and stressed the need for a strategic increase in defence budgets with a minimum of 3%. Mr David also advocated for reforming the UK’s defence procurement process and developing sovereign capability through an indigenous industrial strategy.

Mr Lopresti emphasises the importance of maintaining UK defence expenditure to ensure the country remains a credible NATO ally. He highlights the success of Operation Orbital, which has equipped Ukrainian forces and is demonstrating its value in Ukraine's current conflict with Russia. He warns against appeasing dictators and recalls the pledge enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington treaty signed in 1949 by the founding members of NATO to protect each other from attacks. Mr Lopresti also mentions that since 2014, the UK has contributed to air policing missions in the Baltic region and ground forces in Estonia as part of its NATO commitment. He argues against cutting defence expenditure, citing former British Defence Secretary Denis Healey's warning about security imperilment leading to societal collapse. Mr Lopresti stresses the importance of resilience in supply chains, food, and energy security due to Russia’s attempts to weaponise gas supplies.

Commends the Secretary of State and Front-Bench teams for their leadership on Ukraine, emphasising the need for cross-party collaboration to increase defence spending. Highlights the importance of defending democracy and nurturing soft power capabilities in response to recent events. Advocates revisiting the integrated review due to changed circumstances, suggesting a moratorium on defence cuts until new requirements are assessed. Recommends specific measures such as increasing manpower and matériel, separating nuclear deterrent costs from Defence budget, expanding homegrown talent, adopting strategic views for foreign bids, reforming procurement processes, maintaining deep stockpiles of weapons, improving pay and accommodation for personnel, supporting soldiers' mental health, and re-establishing in-house recruitment.

Labour’s commitment to NATO is unshakable, as shown by our support for Ukraine since Russia's illegal invasion. Eighty-five days ago, the choice was made to stand with allies against Putin, strengthening NATO unity. The Labour party proudly supports collective security and its role in international defence. Key questions include supporting Ukraine through new conflict phases, developing NATO 2030, maintaining UK leadership in security, addressing democratic resilience, promoting interoperability among allies, and reinforcing our commitments to NATO values. We must prioritise European security before focusing on the Indo-Pacific, ensuring we secure our own backyard first.

Discussed the importance of NATO, nuclear deterrence, and UK's role in reinforcing NATO’s eastern flank. Highlighted that Scotland’s geographical location is crucial for NATO's strategic plans and criticised the SNP's stance on joining an alliance while wanting to expel its nuclear deterrent.

Asked a brief question regarding who would be responsible for the nuclear deterrent after a vote for Scottish independence, indicating uncertainty over ownership and raising questions about NATO's stance on such matters.

Agreed with the argument that NATO is a nuclear alliance and questioned whether a future Scottish air force would have to deliver the nuclear deterrent, pointing out the complexities involved in SNP's stance on nuclear weapons within NATO.

Did not provide a full position but requested to give way during interventions, indicating an interest in contributing further to the debate without providing substantive details in the given text.