• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

[News] Watch the Debate on Syria live, 29 August PM

DOT

Old-Salt
#1
Thisis an alert for upcoming business inside the Chamber of the House of Commons. We encourage discussion or comments concerning the topic or content of the debate.
The debate will be streamed live on Parliament.tv Player (Please note that Silverlight or Windows Media Player are required to stream Parliament TV)

Motion – Syria and the use of chemical weapons
Thursday 29 August PM.


MPs will debate a motion on Syria in the House of Commons. You can read the Government motion for today’s Commons debate here (PDF)

The debate is expected to start at 2.30pm. Timings are approximate and Parliamentary business is subject to change.

To find out more about the House of Commons Syria debate click here.


 
#2
Well done to our elected representatives last night for voting to keep us out of the disaster that is Syria.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
 
#3
I agree. Democracy in action.

Seeing the debate unfold last night pushed me to consider that UK politics might not be absolutely dead in the water, as I had previously believed. It seemed to me that many MPs actually took time to outline the views of those constituents who contacted them about the matter. I know that several ARRSE members wrote to their representative. Either way, this was a serious step forward in the name of equality and common sense. It is a shame that it took so long but at least it finally happened.

Maybe things will change for the better over the coming years.
 
#4
Well done to our elected representatives last night for voting to keep us out of the disaster that is Syria.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
Agreed,

Cameron denied his chance to take the country to war and just as well with all the cuts that have been imposed by his government.

What next for him and the coalition?
 

DOT

Old-Salt
#5
Following on from the debate last night, the results were:

The House of Commons voted against an Opposition amendment to the Government motion on Syria by 332 votes to 220.

The opposition amendment can be found at Manuscript Amendment


The House of Commons voted against the Government motion on Syria by 285 to 272.

The Government motion was:

That this House:

Deplores the use of chemical weapons in Syria on 21 August 2013 by the Assad regime, which caused hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries of Syrian civilians;

Recalls the importance of upholding the worldwide prohibition on the use of chemical weapons under international law;

Agrees that a strong humanitarian response is required from the international community and that this may, if necessary, require military action that is legal, proportionate and focused on saving lives by preventing and deterring further use of Syria’s chemical weapons;

Notes the failure of the United Nations Security Council over the last two years to take united action in response to the Syrian crisis;

Notes that the use of chemical weapons is a war crime under customary law and a crime against humanity, and that the principle of humanitarian intervention provides a sound legal basis for taking action;

Notes the wide international support for such a response, including the statement from the Arab League on 27 August which calls on the international community, represented in the United Nations Security Council, to “overcome internal disagreements and take action against those who committed this crime, for which the Syrian regime is responsible”;

Believes, in spite of the difficulties at the United Nations, that a United Nations process must be followed as far as possible to ensure the maximum legitimacy for any such action;

Therefore welcomes the work of the United Nations investigating team currently in Damascus, and, whilst noting that the team’s mandate is to confirm whether chemical weapons were used and not to apportion blame, agrees that the United Nations Secretary General should ensure a briefing to the United Nations Security Council immediately upon the completion of the team’s initial mission;

Believes that the United Nations Security Council must have the opportunity immediately to consider that briefing and that every effort should be made to secure a Security Council Resolution backing military action before any such action is taken, and notes that before any direct British involvement in such action a further vote of the House of Commons will take place; and

Notes that this Resolution relates solely to efforts to alleviate humanitarian suffering by deterring use of chemical weapons and does not sanction any action in Syria with wider objectives.

Amendment (a)
Caroline Lucas
Paul Flynn
Jeremy Corbyn
Mr Elfyn Llwyd
Jonathan Edwards
Hywel Williams
Line 1, leave out from ‘House’ to end and add ‘deplores the chemical weapons attacks and appalling loss of life in Syria; notes that the reports of weapons inspectors in Syria are yet to be published, and that there is no UN authorisation for military action; regrets that the Attorney General’s advice on the legality of military action has not been made available to hon. Members; calls for refugees from the Syrian conflict to be fully assisted and supported; and believes that the case for military action against Syria has not been established.’.
 

DOT

Old-Salt
#6
For those interested in the topic of Parliamentary Approval for Deploying the Armed Forces - can we recommend reading the impartial briefing paper created by the House of Commons Library staff on:

Parliamentary Approval for Deploying the Armed Forces:

The paper covers:
The decision to allow Parliament a vote on military action in Iraq in 2003 has been regarded by many as a precedent for prior Parliamentary approval in any future deployments of the Armed Forces in conflict situations.

However, it remains the case that Parliament has no legally established role in approving participation in military action and any formal Parliamentary involvement continues to be determined by the Government.

The commitment of British forces in Afghanistan, for example, has never been subject to a vote on a Government-tabled motion; whereas retrospective approval for the deployment of forces to Libya was sought on 21 March 2011, three days after the announcement of British participation.

The deployment of British military assets in Mali has been neither the subject of a debate, or a vote in Parliament.
Note: The Paper itself opens as a PDF
 

DOT

Old-Salt
#8
#9
We thought that people might be interested in reading the deposited paper sent by the Syrian Speaker to the Speaker of the House of Commons yesterday regarding the Commons Debate on Syria.

We enclose a link to the deposited paper - please note that this opens as a PDF:
Letter dated 29/08/2013 from MHD. Jihad Al-Laham, Speaker of the People's Assembly of Syria, to the Speaker of the House of Commons regarding the debate on launching an attack on Syria.
That is pretty eye-opening. Interesting they did that - I wonder if it's a common thing.
 

Grumblegrunt

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
I agree. Democracy in action.

Seeing the debate unfold last night pushed me to consider that UK politics might not be absolutely dead in the water, as I had previously believed. It seemed to me that many MPs actually took time to outline the views of those constituents who contacted them about the matter. I know that several ARRSE members wrote to their representative. Either way, this was a serious step forward in the name of equality and common sense. It is a shame that it took so long but at least it finally happened.

Maybe things will change for the better over the coming years.
hope so but I doubt it, they will screw us over again like they have allways done. I expect the forces will get punished by the treasury for being disloyal.
 
#12
Don't know if it's been mentioned, but....

is there anywhere to view who voted which way in last nights syria vote ?
Hi Flash Bang - thank you for your question asking about how MPs voted - this is available to view in the Hansard records - House of Commons Hansard Debates for 29 Aug 2013 (pt 0004) (you may have to scroll down the page a bit to find the lists)

The MPs are listed according to Ayes and Noes and alphabetically rather than according to political party.

Hope this helps?
DOT
 

Ravers

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#13
It means nothing.

The UN will return their verdict that Assad used chemical weapons, this coupled with British and American intelligence confirming the same, will over ride the vote and we'll be bombing Syria at some point next week.
 
#14
Fancy placing some money on that? The UN investigation won't reveal anything that we don't already know and certainly won't apportion blame. Given the damage this has done to the government's credibility, they'll be just keen to forget about the whole debacle.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
 
E

EScotia

Guest
#15
That letter reads like it was written by a relative of Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, full of flowery praise, denials of wrong-doing, misdirection and threats.
 
#16
I agree. Democracy in action.

Seeing the debate unfold last night pushed me to consider that UK politics might not be absolutely dead in the water, as I had previously believed. It seemed to me that many MPs actually took time to outline the views of those constituents who contacted them about the matter. I know that several ARRSE members wrote to their representative. Either way, this was a serious step forward in the name of equality and common sense. It is a shame that it took so long but at least it finally happened.

Maybe things will change for the better over the coming years.
Mostly agreed - but I think we are still a long way from true democracy in action.
That vote in the Commons only just went the right side of 50/50.
In my esteemed local House of Public ( Red Lion) it was more like 70/30 against going in- and I sensed a lot doubts in the 30%ers.

The positives I take from this is that, just maybe, our elected representatives are beginning to understand that the majority of the British public have had about as much as we can take of crass, arrogant policies imposed upon us.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts