I am grateful to the many constituents who have got in touch with me and given me their views on the UK’s proposed military involvement in Syria. Please rest assured that I look at every one of these communications.
Constituents who have kept up to date with my website will be aware that I wanted to take my time to reach a decision on this issue having received all information from Government and its advisors as well as those from organisations opposed to military action (such as Stop the War coalition) and views given, both in support and against, by my constituents. I also wanted to be in receipt of the terms of the motion before giving a view.
I have spent considerable time receiving briefings and asking questions. On Tuesday 1 December, I received a briefing from the Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary, Defence Secretary, International Aid Secretary, deputy Chief of Defence Staff and Chairman of Joint Intelligence Committee. This 90 minute briefing was given to all MPs in the House and not just my Conservative colleagues. Later that day, the Prime Minister gave a briefing to his own MPs. Having had issues on this matter which I wanted to specifically discuss and seek answers on, I met with the Foreign Secretary and discussed the UK's long term plan for Syria and its people and how Russia's involvement would play out.
Motion before the House of Commons
That this House notes that ISIL poses a direct threat to the United Kingdom; welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2249 which determines that ISIL constitutes an ‘unprecedented threat to international peace and security’ and calls on states to take ‘all necessary measures’ to prevent terrorist acts by ISIL and to ‘eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria’; further notes the clear legal basis to defend the UK and our allies in accordance with the UN Charter; notes that military action against ISIL is only one component of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria; welcomes the renewed impetus behind the Vienna talks on a ceasefire and political settlement; welcomes the Government’s continuing commitment to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees; underlines the importance of planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction in Syria; welcomes the Government’s continued determination to cut ISIL’s sources of finance, fighters and weapons; notes the requests from France, the US and regional allies for UK military assistance; acknowledges the importance of seeking to avoid civilian casualties, using the UK’s particular capabilities; notes the Government will not deploy UK troops in ground combat operations; welcomes the Government’s commitment to provide quarterly progress reports to the House; and accordingly supports Her Majesty’s Government In taking military action, specifically airstrikes, exclusively against ISIL in Syria; and offers its wholehearted support to Her Majesty’s Armed Forces.
I would ask constituents to pay particular attention to the wording of the motion. Amongst other things the motion:
- Seeks a mandate from Parliament for air strikes but that these must be exclusively against ISIL in Syria;
- Recognises that it will be the Vienna process which will deliver the political settlement in Syria (so not the air strikes which are focussed on ISIL); and
- Repeats the UN motion which was passed and called on states to take all necessary measures to prevent terrorist acts from ISIL and eradicate their safe haven over Iraq and Syria.
My vote
I have decided to vote in favour of the Motion and will therefore be supporting air strikes on Syria. In coming to this conclusion, I considered the briefings and answers to my questions, and those of others, but am struck by the following five points:
- ISIL are plotting attacks on the UK, and neighbouring countries from Syria. We must play a part in stopping this and not contract-out our national security.
- The UK currently carries out air-strikes on ISIL positions in Iraq but stops at the border of Syria. We are widening the coverage area, not deepening our operations.
- Russia, and other partners not usually in agreement with the West, appear persuaded by the argument that regime change is needed in Syria in order to destroy ISIL and deliver peace.
- In line with the above, UK troops would not be put on the ground and it has been acknowledged that their presence would be counter-productive.
- We have given over £1bl in aid to keep Syrian refugees safe, fed, clothed and warm. We have to show that we are pushing even further to allow them to return to their homeland.
I recognise that some constituents will not agree with my decision but I hope that these constituents will recognise that I reached this of my own accord, after assessing all arguments across the divide. I have not made this decision on party political grounds but on what I believe to be the right decision. If this vote is passed then I send my thoughts and respect to those who will be carrying this mandate forward over the skies.
I attach below a summary which I have written up from the numerous briefings. This is designed to explain my views of the case which the Government is seeking to make. I have also attached some Frequently Asked Questions which were asked in the briefings, and have similarly been asked of me. I hope that these questions act as the response to some of the points which constituents have made.