For strikes by ukraine on russian territory, saying it risked escalation of the conflict. Today, russia has revoked the accreditation of six british diplomats, accusing them of spying. State security service, the fsb, said their activities had threatened national security, but did not name any of the diplomats. It said the move was a measure against multiple unfriendly acts and had what it called Documentary Proof confirming Londons Coordination of an escalation in the international political and military situation. Its not clear whether the diplomats are currently in russia. One russian Tv Channel aired footage claiming to show them leaving the country. The Foreign Office here in london has yet to comment. Lord Peter Ricketts is a former top diplomat and former uk national security adviser. He says russia has timed the expulsions to send a message to the uk. Absolutely no doubt, the timing is too coincidental. This is russian punishment for the uk being seen as a cheerleader for supplying weapons to ukraine. And the reasons they give in their statement are completely trumped up. We are told the russian Spy Agency has documents from a department in the Foreign Office which say that the task of the embassy is ensuring russias strategic defeat against ukraine. Well, surprise, surprise, thats been british declared policy for 2. 5 years. So this is a trumped up story to create pressure on the british government. As you would imagine, have much more on their story on our website, every latest developments, lots of Analysis And Reaction and we are monitoring any updates we have from conversations between Sir Keir Starmer and President Biden in washington, who will be talking about this at the top of the agenda. The Prison Population of england and wales fell by more than 2000 in the week of the Mass Release of prisoners at 40 of their sentence. Figures published in the past Hour Show that the weekly Prison Population was down 2188 on the previous week. With me is our home Affairs Correspondent daniel sandford. Arguably, no surprise given what we were seeing at the beginning of the week that this population has fallen . Population has fallen . Exactly the result the population has fallen . Exactly the result the Government Population has fallen . Exactly| the result the government had wanted by releasing all of these prisoners at 40 of their sentences rather than 50 . The Prison Population this morning stood at 46,333, down more than 2000 in a week. This was something is developed by the Labour Government when it came into Power Injuly but by august of the Prison Population went up by 1000 so in fact, if you look across a piece from the beginning of august, theyve only actually reduced theyve only actually reduced the population by 1000 from the top level, so its not as good as it might have been because of the Writing And Disorder over the Summer. Of the Writing And Disorder over the Summer. Even while we are witnessing over the Summer. Even while we are witnessing that over the Summer. Even while we are witnessing that mass are witnessing that Mass Release, that question over how much time the government has bought itself is still really important. 1 bought itself is still really important bought itself is still really imortant. ~. important. I think it was an idea that important. I think it was an idea that they important. I think it was an idea that they may important. I think it was an idea that they may be important. I think it was an L Idea that they may be bought themselves 18 months before the rating up against the maximum population again with the Mass Release this week and the one scheduled for october. I think because of the increase Prison Population just from the writing this Summer there is a sense that that amount of time they have bought themselves has come down closer to a year. These things are fairly unpredictable, we dont know how good the courts to be next yearin how good the courts to be next year in terms of recovering from the pandemic but certainly do not bind themselves ten or 15 years headroom, it is a matter of a year or so. When we talk about matter of a year or so. When we talk about that matter of a year or so. When we talk about that next matter of a year or so. When we talk about that next Mass Talk about that next Mass Release, notably on the same terms as this one . {iii release, notably on the same terms as this one . Terms as this one . Of the release terms as this one . Of the release this terms as this one . Of the release this week terms as this one . Of the release this week for terms as this one . Of the release this week for fourj terms as this one . Of the release this week for four sick people with sentences of less than five years or four years or less for violent offenders. The next release will be for people with sentences over five years, people with sentences up to ten years will be coming out at the 40 stage rather than 50 . So its a different kind of prisoner. We hope not serious, violent offenders, thatis serious, violent offenders, that is what the Governments Intention is but there are always odd cases that fall through the cracks so there will inevitably be at high Risk Prisoners being released in octoberjust as prisoners being released in october just as they were this week as well. Octoberjust as they were this week as well. In the uk, the first so called Citizens Jury on Assisted Dying in england has backed a change in the law to allow people who are terminally ill to end their life. The jury of 30 people spent eight weeks listening to Expert Evidence and campaigners, and concluded it should only be an option for those who are terminally ill and have the capacity to make their own decisions. Our medical Editor Fergus Walsh has the details. Away from the placards and the protests, the citizensjury was intended to produce a measured response to this highly sensitive issue. Jury members were selected to be representative of the makeup and the views of the population, which meant most were already in favour of Assisted Dying at the start. By three to one, the jury voted in favour of the law being changed to allow Assisted Dying for those with a terminal condition who have the capacity to make their own decisions. The lethal drug could be self administered or given by a health professional. Ashok was part of the jury and says they were given time to explore the issue in depth. It was an amazing experience and it was nerve racking. It was sensitive. It was like a mixed emotion to be part of this actually, because it is a very sensitive topic to be deliberated. OurJury Members wanted terminally ill people not to suffer and prolong the agony, and to have the option to choose to die in their own country rather than going abroad to die. A minority ofjurors were concerned that Assisted Dying could be misused without adequate safeguards. There was near universal support for more funding for palliative care. We know that policymakers want to have more evidence about what The Public think. They want to understand the richness, the detail of peoples views and understand where, for example, people want to see safeguards and other considerations around, for example, palliative care. Opinion polls have consistently shown overwhelming public support for Assisted Dying in the uk. The prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, has said hes committed to giving mps a free vote on the issue at some point. Private members bills have already been introduced at westminster and at the scottish parliament, holyrood. The Isle Of Man and jersey, which pass their own laws, are already on track to introduce Assisted Dying. But throughout the british isles the impassioned debate on this key issue will continue. At my thanks to fergus was there and we will pick up this conversation with the Social Worker We Saw in that report. And ceo for care not killing, a uk based Alliance Group against Assisted Dying, Dr Gordon macdonald. We saw you there speaking to fergus walsh, tell us a little bit about that process of being on that Jury Bit about that process of being on thatjury and coming to that conclusion. It is a very difficult conversation that you as Jury Members difficult conversation that you Asjury Members on difficult conversation that you as Jury Members on this Citizens Jury as Jury Members on this citizensjury had. It Asjury Members on this citizensjury had. AsJury Members on this citizensjury had. Citizens ury had. It was i reall citizensjury had. It was i really difficult citizensjury had. It was i really difficult Situation L Citizensjury had. It was i | really difficult situation to be in because it is highly sensitive and a highly debated topic over the last two decades. It was not easy for us to arrive at the decision, most of the people came in being on the fence but we discuss the risks and benefits for voting for and against Assisted Dying. There were a lot of case examples discussed and a lot of Panel Discussions and people are coming from different backgrounds, all walks of life, talking about the personal and professional experience to Assisted Dying and how they went through it in their own personal experience. It was not arriving at the decision, it was going through the process of understanding and critically analysing and weighing the pros and cons of everything to arrive at the decision, along with fellow Jury Members. Arrive at the decision, along with fellowJury Members. This with fellow my members. This U Of With Fellow ury members. This juryofso with fellowJury Members. This jury of 30 peeple with fellowJury Members. This jury of 30 people spending eight weeks discussing this, painstakingly analysing it. Dr gordon, you have concerns about the Make Up of the jury . Gordon, you have concerns about the Make Up of thejury . I the Make Up of the jury . I wouldnt expect a jury to have predetermined views on the subject predetermined views on the subject. Im not questioning a shocks subject. Im not questioning a Shocks Integrity in terms of his approach to this but the point his approach to this but the point is, his approach to this but the point is, you would make the Point Point is, you would make the point of point is, you would make the point of having a jury that had clearly point of having a jury that had clearly not a predetermined view clearly not a predetermined view one clearly not a predetermined view one way or the other, that is the view one way or the other, that is the Way View one way or the other, that is the way a view one way or the other, that is the way a jury should operate. If you use the process of saying operate. If you use the process of saying we should have two thirds of saying we should have two thirds or of saying we should have two thirds or three quarters of the Ury Thirds or three quarters of the Jury Members in favour at the start, Jury Members in favour at the start, that Jury Members in favour at the start, that clearly calls into question start, that clearly calls into question the result at The End of the question the result at The End of the day, because its unlikely of the day, because its unlikely you are going to get any other result than support. Asok, any other result than support. Asok, is any other result than support. Asok, is that a fair point . Were the members on yourjury arguably having a predetermined view . Is that something you sensed ... , sensed . The last vote happened on the last sensed . The last vote happened on the last day, sensed . The last vote happened on the last day, facetoface. I on the last day, Face To face. I came in on the fence because i came in on the fence because i do understand that had a preconceived idea before, having been guided by my own beliefs, but i never knew Anything Otherjury Members Anything other Jury Members throughout anything otherJury Members throughout the process has an idea beforehand. They probably had an idea but it was not shared until the last minute. But it was caught in a fair way as far as but it was caught in a fair way as farasi but it was caught in a fair way as far as i was concerned, because nobody influenced any decision throughout the jury process. It was fair and it was also, the information was given for us to make an informed decision in The End. Dr gordon, are Ou Decision in The End. Dr gordon, are you satisfied decision in The End. Dr gordon, are you satisfied with decision in The End. Dr gordon, are you satisfied with that . Decision in The End. Dr gordon, are you satisfied with that . Is i are you satisfied with that . Is important to stress that the Citizens Jury will help to inform but it doesnt have any legal standing. Inform but it doesnt have any legalstanding. I inform but it doesnt have any legal standing. Legal standing. I think thats a really important legal standing. I think thats a really important point a really important point because what we consistently see is because what we consistently see is when politicians who do have see is when politicians who do Have A See is when politicians who do have a legal standing, they make have a legal standing, they Make Law and they are conscious of their Make Law and they are conscious of their responsibility, so if we have of their responsibility, so if we have this discussion in the abstract, we have this discussion in the abstract, we see this in opinion abstract, we see this in Opinion Polls and i suspect in the citizensjury Opinion Polls and i suspect in the Citizens Jury process too, the Citizens Jury process too, The Public generally dont want to say The Public generally dont want to say no The Public generally dont want to say no to people for things and we to say no to people for things and we generally have an approach saying, if it doesnt affect approach saying, if it doesnt affect me, who am i to impose my view affect me, who am i to impose my view on affect me, who am i to impose my view on Someone Else . But that is my view on Someone Else . But that is different from legislating and when you legislate and you are a Politician And Youve got day in, Politician And Youve got day in. Day Politician And Youve got day in, day out, you fine people being in, day out, you fine people being failed by the system, by public being failed by the system, by public services that are waiting public services that are waiting just smarter years for an operation, who cant get access an operation, who cant get access to an operation, who cant get access to palliative care, you are conscious of your responsibility not to introduce something which cant be protected. Its easy to say we should protected. Its easy to say we should put safeguards in but the problem is that the safeguards very quickly get seen safeguards very quickly get seen as safeguards very quickly get seen as barriers to Access And Et seen as barriers to access and get remove. The safeguards dont get remove. The safeguards dont actually work in practice. Thats why politicians in our experience over politicians in our experience over about 20 odd years in sicily over about 20 odd years in sicily decide they dont want to do sicily decide they dont want to do this. Because they dont think to do this. Because they dont think its to do this. Because they dont think its not a good idea in principle, think its not a good idea in principle, because they realise when principle, because they realise when they think it through that its more when they think it through that its more difficult than it appears. Its more difficult than it appears its more difficult than it appears. Its more difficult than it aearshh. appears. Jacques, whats your understanding appears. Jacques, whats your understanding as appears. Jacques, whats your understanding as to appears. Jacques, whats your understanding as to what appears. Jacques, whats Yourj Understanding as to what your conclusion will be, how that will feed into letting politicians understand what people are feeling about such an issue, which is really impassioned and people really feel strongly for and against it . feel strongly for and against it .. it . Law in the uk do not permit eole it . Law in the uk do not permit peeple to it . Law in the uk do not permit peeple to die it . Law in the uk do not permit people to die but it . Law in the uk do not permit people to die but allow it . Law in the uk do not permit people to die but allow people | people to die but allow people to refuse treatment. If a patient is refusing treatment, then they go through the pain for a longer period of time and this is in the law, where people are not allowed to choose Assisted Dying. That doesnt make any sense to me as a Jury Member because we should be given the option. I think people should be given the option, they should be given the information. If you have do not resuscitate in place and advanced decisions in place, i think we should also be an option for the people out there so they can make an informed decision and be empowered to take control of their own life. Dr gordon, that option a shock then was describing is for those who are terminally ill and have the capacity to make their own decision. Does that make you feel more comfortable . The problem is that definitions of Terminal Illness can be very broad of Terminal Illness can be very broad in of Terminal Illness can be very broad. In scotland, the bill in the scottish parliament, the definition can apply to people have definition can apply to people have years or even decades to live because the condition does not have live because the condition does not have to have you imminently dvind not have to have you imminently dying i not hav