Cameron told MPs must vote before launching strikes on Syria

[dutchman]

David Cameron is under mounting pressure to recall Parliament before authorising military action against Syria after more than 80 Conservative MPs called for a say over deeper British involvement in the conflict.

Labour formally called on the Prime Minister to make his case to MPs and provide clear legal justification before any missile assaults are launched on Assad regime targets inside Syria.

Senior Liberal Democrat and Tory figures also renewed their demands for a Commons vote this week, if a strike is being planned before Parliament returns from the summer break next Monday.

In 2006, while in opposition, Mr Cameron used a major speech to say there must be curbs on a Prime Minister’s power to go to war and that MPs should be given the final say over military action.

Earlier this summer, the Speaker of the Commons, John Bercow, welcomed a commitment from the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, to give MPs a vote.

Mr Bercow suggested he would regard the failure of the government to allow a vote before committing British military resources to the conflict as “undemocratic” and “inappropriate”.

The Speaker is powerless to recall MPs unless he is first approached with a formal request from the Government.

However, 81 Tory MPs signed a letter to Mr Cameron in June demanding that Parliament must be consulted before Britain becomes more deeply involved in the bloody civil war in Syria.

Andrew Bridgen, the Conservative MP for North-West Leicestershire, who coordinated that letter, said his colleagues had been assured that they would be given “a debate and a substantive vote”. He demanded that the government now honour its promise.

“We live in a parliamentary democracy, not a brutal dictatorship,” he said. “The letter was specifically about arming the rebels but also about any further escalation of the conflict.

“I would imagine that if colleagues wanted to have a debate about arming rebels they would certainly want to have one about the potential for a cruise missile or tomahawk missile strike," he said.

“There isn’t a good solution to this crisis. I would hope that with a parliamentary debate we might come up with the least worst solution for the Syrian people and the UK.

“We need to establish what we are trying to achieve and the parameters of any military action.”

Mr Bridgen said that MPs were asked before Parliament broke up for the long summer recess whether they would be happy to be called back to debate the life of Nelson Mandela, in the event of the former South African president’s death.

“It would be bizarre in that case if we didn’t have a recall of Parliament to debate military intervention in Syria.

“Parliament should be recalled tonight. We should sit tomorrow. It is what we are here for.”

Paul Burstow, chairman of the Parliamentary Liberal Democrats and a former health minister, said it would be “crucial" for Parliament to "debate and vote" any British involvement in military action.

John Baron, the Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, said the Commons must be allowed to discuss the risks before Britain becomes committed to military involvement in the conflict.

“It is an undeniable fact that the more you intervene, the more you become responsible for events on the ground. Mission creep is a real possibility once you have crossed the line,” he said.

Mr Baron warned that the potential for wider regional escalation resulting from the West intervening in the Syrian conflict would be greater than it was in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative MP for Totnes, said Britain’s national security was not at immediate risk and there was no need for the Prime Minister to authorise missile strikes without consulting Parliament.

“Clearly, if our national security is at threat we expect the Government to make decisions rapidly on our behalf,” she told BBC Radio 4’s World at One. “But that isn’t the case here, this is a complex ethical issue with grave risks of further escalation and I think in that context it’s absolutely right for Parliament to debate this issue.”

“I think very many people around the county would feel very gravely concerned about that decision being taken by a very small number of people without the opportunity for them to have a say through their MP.”

Labour's Shadow Foreign Secretary, Douglas Alexander, said both Mr Cameron and Mr Hague had promised that Parliament would be recalled before a decision about further British involvement would be taken.

“While of course I understand the Foreign Secretary's reluctance to discuss specific military deployments, he and the Prime Minister do need to be open about the objectives, the legal basis, and the anticipated effect of any possible UK military action in Syria,” he said.

“Given both the seriousness of the reported chemical weapons strikes in Syria, and the enduring and complex nature of the conflict itself, ahead of any action being taken I would fully expect the Prime Minister to make his case to Parliament.”

[rebbonk]

This is yet more distraction we don't need.

Let the Middle East sort it's own problems out, and If that imbecile Hague wants to get involved, let him go and join up as a mercenary supporting his favoured side. Hague has never been anywhere, never seen anything, never done anything and has absolutely no idea about the reality of the Arab world.

<rant mode off>

[rebbonk]

source : Parliament Bills

[rebbonk]

EDIT: Oh, it's a private member's bill. It won't get anywhere.

Most likely not

[rebbonk]

Source : Washington Times

[dutchman]

[dutchman]

[rebbonk]

Source : Emirates 247

[dutchman]

[dutchman]

David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons



British MPs have voted against possible military action against Syria to deter the use of chemical weapons.

David Cameron said it was clear the British Parliament does not want action and "I will act accordingly".

The government motion was defeated 285 to 272, a majority of 13 votes.

It effectively rules out British involvement in any US-led strikes against the Assad regime.

And it comes as blow to the authority of David Cameron, who had already watered down a government motion proposing military action, in response to the opposition Labour Party's demands for more evidence of Assad's guilt.

Labour had seen its own amendment - calling for "compelling" evidence - rejected by MPs by 114 votes.

But - in an unexpected turn of events - MPs also rejected the government's motion in support of military action in Syria if it was supported by evidence from United Nations weapons inspectors, who are investigating claims President Bashar al-Assad's regime had used chemical weapons against civilians.