The Huffington Post's Paul Waugh asks to what extent are the intelligence services at fault.

Mr Jones says there is a "genuine nervousness about getting involved in the democratic process. I think we all appreciate the reasons for that.

"This was a ministerial decision, short of a big flashing light outside Number 10 that this was going on they couldn't have missed this, and it wasn't taken.

"To sidestep and say blame the agencies wasn't fair."

The committee is also asked what the evidence is that the government "actively avoided" investigating?

Mr Hosie said: "I thought I said there was no active running away from it, nevertheless no action was taken and it wasn't investigated."

Image source, PA Media

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab says: "We've been clear that Russia must desist from its attacks on the UK and our allies.

"We will be resolute in defending our country, our democracy and our values from such hostile state activity."

Image source, European Photopress Agency

Financier and Putin critic Bill Browder gave evidence to the committee.

He praises the report saying it recognises "the whole Russian enabler problem in London - lawyers, accountants and consultants getting rich off dirty Russians".

He welcomes the report's recommendations to strengthen the National Crime Agency to investigate "dirty Russian money in the UK", to introduce a law to "improve transparency in Russian lobbying" and to use sanctions "against crooked Russian officials".

The Daily Mail's Larisa Brown asks if the UK has sufficient tools to combat attempted cyber warfare, and she also asks what the reason was for the delay in publication.

"The government delayed this report," replies Labour's Kevan Jones, and it "attempted to discredit it". He adds that the report should have been published before the 2019 general election.

The SNP's Stewart Hosie says any lessons which could have been learned will be learned later "than they ought to have been" to stop other cyber attacks.

He adds there is a "ridiculously complex" diagram of responsibility for various arms of security and intelligence in the UK from different ministers.

Sam Lister from the Express asks why the committee believes the government "doesn't want to touch this with a 10ft pole"?

Stewart Hosie replies: "As to why the government won't touch this, perhaps that is a question you would like to ask them."

He says trust needed to be ensured in the electoral process and it is "beyond this committee to why there has been such an omission and information of potential interference was never requested".

Image source, Getty Images

The Russia report calls for the security services now to undertake an assessment of interference in the EU referendum - though it has no powers to instruct them to do so.

It also highlights disagreements between the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and security agencies over who should monitor disinformation in elections.

"The issue of defending the UK’s democratic processes and discourse has appeared to be something of a 'hot potato’, with no one organisation recognising itself as having an overall lead," the report says.

It adds the government "had not seen or sought evidence of successful interference in UK democratic processes".

More opposition MPs are now commenting on the report

Liberal Democrats acting leader Sir Ed Davey tweeted: "Outrageous that Russian interference in UK elections and referendums has never been investigated properly.

"It is wilfully negligent for the government to turn a blind eye to this, we need a proper investigation into the full role that Russian interference has played in our democracy."

The Guardian's Luke Harding asks if Downing Street and security agencies should now launch an investigation into the 2016 referendum.

The SNP's Stewart Hosie says, "yes, self-evidently... not least to ensure that future electoral processes can be protected from similar interference".

Mr Jones adds that it's about "making sure" that integrity can be protected in the democratic process.

Mr Harding says he suspects the prime minister will be "reluctant" to investigate the interference in the 2016 referendum.

"This is not about party politics, this is above that," replies Kevan Jones, saying people need "faith that their vote counts".

Andy Bell from Channel 5 asks for the worst example the committee can give on Russian interference in the UK's democratic process.

SNP MP Stewart Hosie replies: "That is the question we want to have answered.

"We don't know because no assessment of previous electoral events was undertaken... and that's absolutely shocking."

Labour MP Kevan Jones adds that "it did shock me that the government has not actually looked in this area".

Mr Hosie says this is "the first time these sorts of matters are being discussed widely".

Image source, Getty Images

Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy tweets: "It is extraordinary that the prime minister took the political decision last October ahead of the general election to block the publication of this important report that systematically goes through the threat Russia poses to the UK's national security.

"The report is very clear that the government has underestimated the response required to Russia and it is imperative we learn the lessons from the mistakes that have been made.

"The Labour Party calls on the government to study the conclusions of the report carefully and take the necessary steps to keep our country safe."

The committee report suggests that the government has been slow to wake up to the potential threat from Russia.

It states: "The recent changes in resourcing to counter Russian Hostile State Activity are not (or not only) due to a continuing escalation of the threat – but appear to be an indicator of playing catch-up."

And it complains of a lack of resources in looking at the role of Russian money in the UK.

"The National Crime Agency lacks the resources required in terms of financial investigators, technical experts and legal expertise – this must be rectified," it says.

Image source, pa

Sky News' Deborah Haynes asks if those in charge of spy agencies "should have been more forceful" in dealing with this "hot potato".

The SNP's Stewart Hosie says the government "should have instructed" these intelligence organisations to investigate.

He says MI5 "perhaps should have done this work" themselves. He says someone "at the heart of government might have wanted to know" if the "efficacy" of democratic processes in the UK was okay.

Labour's Kevan Jones says that no-one in government looked at the "flashing lights" that were warning of Russian interference in referendums.

Ms Haynes asks if the government was "deliberately evasive" on whether Russia has interfered in the UK's democracy.

"It's impossible to prove whether that interference was successful or otherwise" but he says the government has never asked the question, replies Stewart Hosie.

"The government should now sit up and pay attention" in the area of Russian interference, he adds.

The report calls for more transparency from peers in their dealings with Russia and a new requirement to register their interests.

It says: "Several members of the Russian elite who are closely linked to Putin are identified as being involved with charitable and/or political organisations in the UK, having donated to political parties, with a public profile which positions them to assist Russian influence operations.

"It is notable that a number of members of the House of Lords have business interests linked to Russia, or work directly for major Russian companies linked to the Russian state.

"These relationships should be carefully scrutinised, given the potential for the Russian state to exploit them."

The report notes that "while MPs must register individual payments of more than £100 they receive for any employment outside the House – this does not apply to the House of Lords."

It suggests the same rules should be applied to the House of Lords.

Nick Eardley
Political correspondent

Kevan Jones says that "the government here has let us down" over not investigating Russian interference after the 2014 Scottish referendum.

"It wasn't that this some sort of wild fishing expedition," he says. "There was clear evidence not only from the Scottish referendum, but the leak in the US."

Stewart Hosie says there was a "complete lack of clarity" on who should take responsibility" - it was a "hot potato" - and "no-one wanted to take responsibility".

Stewart Hosie warns that there are links by some members of the House of Lords to established Russian state companies.

The UK is home to Putin's critics, and the Salisbury poisonings showed the threat to those people living in the country, he continues.

The UK government "took its eye off the ball" and has "badly underestimated the response required to the Russian threat, and is still playing catch up".

Russia poses an "intelligence challenge" to the UK, and the Official Secrets Act is "simply not fit for purpose".

Until that is changed, "the intelligence community's hands are tied"

We are still going through the report which was published at 10:30 BST but here are a few of the key points so far:

• The Intelligence and Security Committee has stated that "Russian influence in the UK is the new normal"
• It accuses "successive governments" of welcoming "oligarchs and their money with open arms, providing them with a means of recycling illicit finance through the London ‘laundromat’, and connections at the highest levels with access to UK companies and political figures"
• The committee has not, however, assessed the extent of Russian influence on the Brexit referendum arguing it "would be difficult – if not impossible – to assess, and we have not sought to do so"
• On influencing elections, the report concludes "in terms of the direct threat to elections, we have been informed that the mechanics of the UK’s voting system are deemed largely sound"
• But the report calls for ‘immediate action’ – new legislation is required to give the intelligence services the tools they need to tackle "this very capable adversary"
• The report says that it appears that Russia considers the UK one of its top intelligence targets and "the security threat posed by Russia is difficult to manage..it appears fundamentally nihilistic... it is also seemingly fed by paranoia".