LABOUR leader Jeremy Corbyn caused outrage in the Commons yesterday, when he suggested Russia might not be behind the chemical attack on the streets of Salisbury.

Corbyn, in his response to the Prime Minister, seemed to suggest Vladimir Putin could have been framed.

READ MORE: SNP give their backing to Tory sanctions on Russian 'spies'

The left-winger’s statement infuriated the Tories, upset many of his own backbenchers and strained Labour’s fragile post-election truce.

There was even talk of resignations in the shadow cabinet.

Corbyn had asked May if, as she suggested on Monday, there was still a possibility that the Russian government could have lost control of some or all of its stock of nerve agent.

But May in her statement said the government had ruled that out after Moscow seemed to treat “the use of a military-grade nerve agent in Europe with sarcasm, contempt and defiance”.

The row intensified when Corbyn’s spin-doctor Seamus Milne then suggested the British intelligence services weren’t very reliable.

Speaking to reporters after the statement, Milne said: “There is a history in relation to weapons of mass destruction and intelligence which is problematic, to put it mildly.

“So, I think the right approach is to seek the evidence to follow international treaties, particularly in relation to prohibitive chemical weapons.”

Pressed on whether Moscow was being framed, he said the “overwhelming” evidence pointed to either the Russian state being responsible or losing control of the agent.

He added: “If the material is from the Soviet period, the break up of the Soviet state led to all sorts of military material ending up in random hands.”

The spokesman said that during the “WMD saga” there was “both what was actually produced by the intelligence services, which in the end we had access to, and then there was how that was used in the public domain in politics.

“So, there is a history of problems in relation to interpreting that evidence but, in this case, the Government may well have other evidence that we are not aware of.

“Clearly this issue has to be followed on the basis of the evidence.”

A number of Labour MPs, embarrassed by Corbyn and his spin doctor, tabled an early day motion “unequivocally” accepting that Russia was behind the attack.

Even MPs normally loyal to Corbyn kept quiet rather than rushing to his defence.

One Labour MP described Milne as Putin’s “craven, constant and shameful apologist”.

The spokesman should “stand aside and let the Kremlin write the speeches and brief the media directly,” the MP added.