MPs are currently in a cross-party briefing with a number of Cabinet Ministers about tomorrow’s vote on Syria. The Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, the Defence Secretary and the International Development Secretary are leading the briefing. Number 10 is very keen to show that MPs have had every opportunity to ask questions, with the Prime Minister’s statement on the Strategic Defence and Security Review last Monday referring to the need for action, as well as his statement in the House on Thursday on his plan for British involvement in air strikes. In that second session, he took questions from 103 MPs.
The government has also tried to make it as easy as possible for Labour MPs to support the motion tomorrow, trying to answer the four points set out in the party’s conference motion in the text tabled for debate for tomorrow. Below are the four conditions that the party set in September in bold, with the relevant sections of the government motion below in italics:
Conference believes the Parliamentary Labour Party should oppose any such extension unless the following conditions are met:
1. Clear and unambiguous authorisation for such a bombing campaign from the United Nations;
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;
2. A comprehensive European Union-wide plan is in place to provide humanitarian assistance to the increased number of refugees that even more widespread bombing can be expected to lead to;
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
3. Such bombing is exclusively directed at military targets directly associated with ‘Islamic State’, noting that if the bombing campaign advocated by the British government in 2013 had not been blocked by the PLP under Ed Miliband’s leadership, ‘Islamic State’ forces might now be in control of far more Syrian territory, including Damascus.
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.
4. Any military action is subordinated to international diplomatic efforts, including the main regional powers, to bring the Syrian civil war to an end, since only a broadly-based and sovereign Syrian government can ultimately retake territory currently controlled by ‘Islamic State’.
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;
Few MPs dispute that the government has been very forthcoming with time both in and out of the Commons. But many do have sympathy with some of the questions raised by Tom Watson this morning. Many are still concerned about the reliability of the Prime Minister’s claim that there are 70,000 moderate opposition forces on the ground in Syria who can help with the fight against Islamic State. That the Cabinet meeting did not discuss this figure is odd.
But the government’s approach does still contrast with the way that the Labour leadership is handling this issue. While Tom Watson asks questions about troops and asks, not particularly unreasonably, for a delay, Jeremy Corbyn is telling the Jeremy Vine show that ‘there are a small number who are very diehard in supporting the war’, which is a way to show that you’re definitely holding a free vote in a way that respects and honours the choices that your colleagues have made. The Labour leader also told Jeremy Vine that ‘the parliamentary Labour party is a very important part of the Labour party, but it is not the entirety of it’.
Corbyn is right that there is no whip on this issue. Or at least, he is right that there is no official party whip. But instead, he is relying on a larger group of unofficial whips outside the parliamentary party, who are lobbying MPs in their constituencies not to support the action. This is – according to those on the receiving end of the ‘pressure’ that Stop the War and Momentum have been applying – deeply unpleasant and counterproductive as it does not involve the sort of conversations and feedback that normally occur in a formal party whipping process.
Contrary to popular myth, the whips (when they are working well) often organise briefings for MPs and help pass on their concerns, rather than harangue them and expect them to change their mind without engaging in any dialogue. The two lobbying groups clearly take a dim view of MPs if they think that ‘pressure’ alone will change many minds on an issue of war. Even though the government’s approach is still failing to answer MPs’ concerns about 70,000 troops and other details, it is a darn sight better than the one taken by the Opposition.
Comments