02/12/2015

:00:00. > :00:08.Welcome to this Daily Politics Special, live

:00:09. > :00:11.from Westminster, where MPs will spend today debating and then voting

:00:12. > :00:50.on whether Britain should bomb Islamic State targets in Syria.

:00:51. > :00:52.Normal parliamentary business has been put aside today.

:00:53. > :01:01.Instead MPs will spend over 10 hours debating whether to step up military

:01:02. > :01:03.operations against Islamic State jihadists by extending air strikes

:01:04. > :01:07.The Prime Minister, who set out his case

:01:08. > :01:10.for strikes last week, is confident he'll get the majority he wants.

:01:11. > :01:13.Otherwise he wouldn't be having the vote.

:01:14. > :01:19.But last night, he was condemned for telling Conservative rebels

:01:20. > :01:22.they should not vote with Jeremy Corbyn and what he called

:01:23. > :01:27.Labour described the remarks as a "contemptible slur".

:01:28. > :01:30.The Labour leader says opposition to war is growing.

:01:31. > :01:32.And that the Prime Minister's proposals didn't stack up.

:01:33. > :01:35.But he's been accused of bullying his own MPs

:01:36. > :01:42.The first British jets could be over Syria as early as tomorrow morning,

:01:43. > :01:44.if as expected, MPs vote in favour of action.

:01:45. > :01:47.The PM has claimed 70,000 supposedly moderate Syrian

:01:48. > :01:56.And what do you, the public, make of it all?

:01:57. > :01:58.One new poll suggests millions of British voters have turned

:01:59. > :02:01.against airstrikes in the last few days, though there's

:02:02. > :02:18.Conservative Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, and former Labour

:02:19. > :02:31.MPs will spend over 10 hours debating the military,

:02:32. > :02:33.moral and political case for striking IS targets in Syria,

:02:34. > :02:38.culminating in a vote at around about 10 o'clock tonight.

:02:39. > :02:43.A vote which David Cameron is expected to win.

:02:44. > :02:54.We can't hide from these people, we can't pull the quilt over our heads.

:02:55. > :02:58.They have killed British citizens in Sousse in Tunisia, we have thwarted

:02:59. > :03:02.seven Isil inspired or Isil directed terrorist plots on the streets

:03:03. > :03:09.The Russian plane that was downed at Sharm el-Sheikh, almost certainly by

:03:10. > :03:12.an Isil bomb, could easily have been a British plane carrying British

:03:13. > :03:18.They are going after us and the only way we can protect

:03:19. > :03:20.ourselves is fighting back, hitting back at them, degrading

:03:21. > :03:37.them, reducing their capacity to plan and plot attacks against us.

:03:38. > :03:42.The Prime Minister will almost certainly win his vote but has there

:03:43. > :03:47.been a sense that arguments have been slipping away from him? I don't

:03:48. > :03:51.think so. When you come to a point of decision, some people who are

:03:52. > :03:54.undecided are a bit nervous about committing themselves to something

:03:55. > :04:01.that will involve loss of life, that is a natural human reaction. The

:04:02. > :04:03.public also appreciate this is the UK joining the rest of the

:04:04. > :04:07.international community who are already carrying out this exercise

:04:08. > :04:14.and is no conceivable argument for saying it is proper to bomb Isis in

:04:15. > :04:19.Iraq but not the same in Syria when Isis themselves don't recognise a

:04:20. > :04:23.border between the countries. The Prime Minister has been trying to

:04:24. > :04:30.build a big majority. He has been conciliatory towards those on the

:04:31. > :04:33.other side who have some doubts. It didn't help when he decided to

:04:34. > :04:39.describe some of the people who don't agree with him as terrorist

:04:40. > :04:43.sympathisers. I think he realises that themselves, it was an

:04:44. > :04:46.unfortunate comment that came out, which was not appropriate and eyes

:04:47. > :04:53.as Becky will be the first to acknowledge that. -- I suspect. Some

:04:54. > :04:58.Labour MPs seem to be under some pretty unpleasant pressure.

:04:59. > :05:05.Absolutely and it is disgusting, I bought is happening. Why has this

:05:06. > :05:11.become so toxic in the Labour Party? Sadly the whole issue has become

:05:12. > :05:19.about Jeremy Corbyn, the leadership of the party, rather than focusing

:05:20. > :05:23.on this most serious issues. Both parties are divided to some extent,

:05:24. > :05:28.the Tories left so but they have their rebels also. Labour seem to be

:05:29. > :05:34.deeply divided on this, all over the place. Indeed, you could say that.

:05:35. > :05:39.It is right to say there are passions on both sides of the

:05:40. > :05:43.argument which is understandable and absolutely right because it is so

:05:44. > :05:48.serious. But what is a disgrace is the way people are being harried and

:05:49. > :05:50.threatened by colleagues in the Parliamentary Labour Party but also

:05:51. > :05:55.by party members up and down the country. Do you think this will, in

:05:56. > :06:01.the end, come to an issue for some MPs, to put it another way, are you

:06:02. > :06:06.aware of Labour MPs who are frightened of facing deselection as

:06:07. > :06:11.a result of positions they might take? Yes, I am, and I feel

:06:12. > :06:16.especially for those new members of the House of Commons. People who

:06:17. > :06:20.have been there for five or ten years, their skins tend to be

:06:21. > :06:26.thicker but for new members it is a very... It is very difficult. They

:06:27. > :06:30.are under pressure. It is hard to see how Labour puts itself together

:06:31. > :06:33.after this. If you work on the assumption that how Mr Corbyn has

:06:34. > :06:38.handled the event is how he will handle things in the future. There

:06:39. > :06:43.are some wise people in the party who I hope will be working with him

:06:44. > :06:46.and counselling him and there are people like Hilary Benn who clearly

:06:47. > :06:51.take a different view to Jeremy Corbyn but I know that Hillary and

:06:52. > :06:56.many people around Jeremy, what they want to do is ensure that is a

:06:57. > :06:59.culture of respect after this vote. Whichever way people vote, they

:07:00. > :07:06.should respect the opinions of others. In reality, what is at stake

:07:07. > :07:12.today is a technical shift, a tactical shift, and yet it has

:07:13. > :07:18.become one of these great occasions of Parliament. It is a huge vote, if

:07:19. > :07:24.the government was to lose, it could well fall. How have we come to this?

:07:25. > :07:30.How has a military shift, with us already bombing in Iraq, how has

:07:31. > :07:37.this become such a totemic issue? Because the government was defeated

:07:38. > :07:40.two years ago. Not on an identical vote but something sufficiently

:07:41. > :07:44.similar that this would be seen as a reversal of that position. When the

:07:45. > :07:47.House of Commons did that, it had a big impact around the world. You

:07:48. > :07:52.have to think back to the 1930s when Oxford union students said they

:07:53. > :07:56.would not fight for King and country and everybody said that was

:07:57. > :08:01.decadent. The people who voted against the government two years ago

:08:02. > :08:04.were not in that situation but it had real damage intervals of our

:08:05. > :08:08.diplomatic clout oversees. And if we all agree that the ultimate solution

:08:09. > :08:12.is not just the destruction of Islamic State but a political

:08:13. > :08:16.solution to the Civil War in Syria, Britain must be part of that

:08:17. > :08:19.initiative. You cannot opt out of the military component and expects

:08:20. > :08:25.to have weight when the diplomacy is to be addressed. Have you come to a

:08:26. > :08:31.view on this issue? I'm glad I don't have to vote on this. It finally

:08:32. > :08:38.balanced but I come down against air strikes in the end. Because? The

:08:39. > :08:44.arguments which are put about the need to have ground forces from the

:08:45. > :08:48.region, the fact that the Prime Minister says there are 70,000

:08:49. > :08:53.people who will be those ground forces, I am not sure they would be

:08:54. > :08:57.a coherent force. Yes, air strikes together with ground forces have

:08:58. > :09:01.worked in Iraq but the situation is very different, there is a standing

:09:02. > :09:05.army and a government that invited people in. The ground Force issue is

:09:06. > :09:11.extremely important and what also bothers me, many if the potential

:09:12. > :09:16.ground forces are people who are, understandably, fighting against

:09:17. > :09:19.President Assad. And the Russians are fighting against those forces.

:09:20. > :09:26.We are getting into very deep waters. The potential ground forces

:09:27. > :09:32.are seen by many as a nonsense. There are two groups of anti-Assad

:09:33. > :09:37.rebels who are not Islamic State. One is in the south, the other in

:09:38. > :09:41.the North and they have divided into 50 or 60 different groups, no way

:09:42. > :09:48.are they a coherent force. But there is an answer to what we have been

:09:49. > :09:52.saying. Air power, even in northern Syria, has already helped because

:09:53. > :09:58.the Kurds, for example, were able to hold on to Kobani, which Islamic

:09:59. > :10:03.State would desperate to get, and they were prevented a combination of

:10:04. > :10:10.the Kurds on the ground and air power. You have chosen the one group

:10:11. > :10:16.that is coherent! That is the Kurds and they are very geographically

:10:17. > :10:21.specific. There is no disagreement that in the rest of the Islamic

:10:22. > :10:25.State area, you will not drive them out of territory by air power alone.

:10:26. > :10:32.The problem we are to address is that will not be resolved overnight

:10:33. > :10:37.-- have two address. So do we leave Isis untouched in their own main

:10:38. > :10:44.command centres? It is not just bombing individuals, it is their

:10:45. > :10:51.convoys, for example. With respect to you, that was not the question.

:10:52. > :10:55.My question was, do you accept that the so-called 70,000 ground forces

:10:56. > :11:00.that the Prime Minister has mentioned can be in no way regarded

:11:01. > :11:05.as a coherent force? They are certainly not a coherent force. If

:11:06. > :11:07.you add up the various resistance groups, there are 70000 and some are

:11:08. > :11:16.quite effective, for example Kneer the Jordanian border. -- near the

:11:17. > :11:20.Jordanian border. They have had local victories but you are right. I

:11:21. > :11:24.hope the government does not think there is a single body of 70,000

:11:25. > :11:31.that can be used at this moment. Let's remind ourselves what MPs will

:11:32. > :11:35.be voting on and debating later and how does the Parliamentary

:11:36. > :11:38.arithmetic add up. We won't know the exact numbers until after the vote.

:11:39. > :11:43.The motion before the Commons today starts by saying so-called

:11:44. > :11:46.Islamic State poses a "direct threat to the United Kingdom".

:11:47. > :11:49.It notes that "military action is only one component

:11:50. > :11:52.of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria".

:11:53. > :11:58.Specific reference is made to "requests from France, the US,

:11:59. > :12:02.and regional allies for UK military assistance".

:12:03. > :12:06.And the motion reiterates the government's commitment

:12:07. > :12:11."not to deploy UK troops in ground combat operations".

:12:12. > :12:15.Finally it provides that the House supports military action,

:12:16. > :12:20."specifically air strikes, exclusively against Isil in Syria",

:12:21. > :12:24.and offers wholehearted support to the British armed forces.

:12:25. > :12:27.In 2013 the government lost a vote to bomb forces in Syria loyal

:12:28. > :12:33.As a result, David Cameron's been reluctant to bring forward

:12:34. > :12:37.a new vote in the current climate because of the risk of losing,

:12:38. > :12:42.but he's confident that support has been "growing" and he can win now.

:12:43. > :12:49.We won't know the exact voting breakdown until after the vote,

:12:50. > :12:52.but it appears that between ten to 15 of the Conservatives' 330 MPs

:12:53. > :12:59.will defy the Prime Minister and oppose air strikes.

:13:00. > :13:05.Figures this morning suggested around 50 of Labour's 231 MPs would

:13:06. > :13:07.support the government, but the BBC has learned Jeremy Corbyn's team are

:13:08. > :13:15.now assuming around 90 Labour MPs will vote for the motion.

:13:16. > :13:18.The SNP have signalled that their 54 MPs still taking the party

:13:19. > :13:23.But the Liberal Democrats and the DUP with eight MPS each will

:13:24. > :13:28.Let's talk now to the Conservative MP, John Baron,

:13:29. > :13:42.John Baron, you are going to vote against air strikes, how did you

:13:43. > :13:48.feel being described by the Prime Minister as a terrorist sympathiser?

:13:49. > :13:52.I will not come at a private meeting but having served in Northern

:13:53. > :13:56.Ireland as a platoon commander, those who vote against air strikes

:13:57. > :14:02.are not terrorist sympathisers -- I cannot comment. Did you think that

:14:03. > :14:06.language was appropriate and helpful when we are talking about issues

:14:07. > :14:10.this serious? There has been a lot of emotive language, I have been

:14:11. > :14:17.called a pacifist and I have the medals to prove I am not. There have

:14:18. > :14:21.been various accusations. We have to have an informed debate, respect the

:14:22. > :14:25.views of each other, there are no easy decisions in foreign policy,

:14:26. > :14:29.there are hard choices. Respect each other and use the language

:14:30. > :14:33.accordingly and if we can't do that, there is something sad, particularly

:14:34. > :14:38.when we are accused of playing politics or personalities. I have

:14:39. > :14:42.consistently opposed international intervention in Iraq and Helmand and

:14:43. > :14:49.Libya and indeed two years ago so this is a matter for me of

:14:50. > :14:57.conscience. And for you, Caroline Flint? Firstly I agree with

:14:58. > :15:00.everything John has just said. For myself and others, this is really

:15:01. > :15:04.difficult, the most serious decision you make is about putting our

:15:05. > :15:08.service men and women into a combat situation whether from the air or

:15:09. > :15:11.the ground. I have gone to several meetings since the statement last

:15:12. > :15:16.week to find out more and I have come down in favour of supporting

:15:17. > :15:17.the air strikes, the extension of our activity in Syria similar to

:15:18. > :15:25.Iraq. That is against what the Labour

:15:26. > :15:29.Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has said. Talking about respect, what has

:15:30. > :15:32.happened to respecting each other's views in the Houses of Parliament.

:15:33. > :15:35.Caroline Flint, have you come under pressure from some in your own party

:15:36. > :15:42.that you would have blood on your hands if you vote in favour of the

:15:43. > :15:46.Government's proposal? None of my party colleagues have said that to

:15:47. > :15:51.me but like a number of my colleagues I have received via

:15:52. > :15:55.social media and e-mails views that are against us supporting the Prime

:15:56. > :15:59.Minister today expressed in language which I think is intolerant and

:16:00. > :16:03.unhelpful. I know that other colleagues have received even

:16:04. > :16:07.worse. It is really important that there is an understanding and

:16:08. > :16:12.respect in this debate. Just to say about the Prime Minister, I think he

:16:13. > :16:15.should apologise for what he is alleged to have said in this

:16:16. > :16:22.meeting. It is completely unhelpful and I say that as someone who will

:16:23. > :16:29.support the Government's motion. Do you think he should apologise, John

:16:30. > :16:32.Baron? I've said my piece, I've made it clear that having served on the

:16:33. > :16:37.streets of Northern Ireland you can vote for air strikes and not be a

:16:38. > :16:42.terrorist sympathiser -- boat against air strikes. What about an

:16:43. > :16:47.amendment in the debate? Can you tell us about that? It is saying

:16:48. > :16:51.that the case for intervention, for war if you like, has not been made.

:16:52. > :16:54.It is broad enough and short enough so that it welcomes anybody from all

:16:55. > :16:59.sides of the house. And there are many of us who have deep concerns

:17:00. > :17:03.about the line that the Government is taking. The central case is we do

:17:04. > :17:08.not have an adamant, realistic long-term strategy, both military

:17:09. > :17:14.and non-military, which includes an exit strategy. That absence featured

:17:15. > :17:19.in our previous interventions in Iraq and in Helmand, in Libya, and

:17:20. > :17:25.would have done two years ago when the Government was asked whether it

:17:26. > :17:28.would side with the rebels. Without the long-term comprehensive strategy

:17:29. > :17:32.and including the exit strategy we are deeply concerned about this,

:17:33. > :17:34.particularly when you can't even identify the local ground forces

:17:35. > :17:38.that will have to take the ground at the end of the day. Caroline, why

:17:39. > :17:44.have you come to the conclusion that it will have a material impact on

:17:45. > :17:48.Isis in Syria? Of course, I don't believe that by extending activity

:17:49. > :17:52.to include air strikes that that is going to get rid of Isil in and of

:17:53. > :17:58.itself, or for that matter solve the problem the Civil War in Syria. But

:17:59. > :18:01.what I do believe is this: I voted 14 months ago to support air strikes

:18:02. > :18:06.in Iraq to tackle the Isil forces there. In Syria we are already

:18:07. > :18:11.supplying intelligence to allow others to pinpoint their air

:18:12. > :18:14.strikes, refuelling and other logistical support as well. Given

:18:15. > :18:18.that we know that Isil doesn't recognise any borders on this I feel

:18:19. > :18:23.that the extension of our activity to support air strikes in the way we

:18:24. > :18:28.have been doing in Iraq, I just think it doesn't make sense not to.

:18:29. > :18:31.If you are against air strikes in Syria people should say they are

:18:32. > :18:34.against what we are doing in Iraq as well. That is the truth of the

:18:35. > :18:41.debate. Thank you for joining us. I will let you go into the chamber.

:18:42. > :18:45.Thanks, Joe Cole. Malcolm Rifkind, other than the symbolic act of

:18:46. > :18:49.showing solidarity with our allies, what is British bombing in Surrey

:18:50. > :18:54.achieve? Specific military point that Britain has certain specific

:18:55. > :18:58.munitions called Brimstone, which are impressive at pinpointing the

:18:59. > :19:01.enemy and not having the same likelihood of creating collateral

:19:02. > :19:05.damage and innocent people being killed. How many missiles do we have

:19:06. > :19:10.of this type? I don't have the specific number. Maybe it does

:19:11. > :19:14.because there are reports we don't have many. That is part of the wider

:19:15. > :19:20.problem of the defence budget. That it is not a significant capability.

:19:21. > :19:23.That is not what our allies believe. King Husein of Jordan this morning

:19:24. > :19:26.wrote in the Daily Telegraph saying Britain is needed as part of the

:19:27. > :19:29.international effort. He's bound to want that, they would all want that,

:19:30. > :19:36.they want all the Allies they can get. It is also the case that the

:19:37. > :19:40.typhoons we are deploying along with the tornadoes cannot carry the

:19:41. > :19:47.Brimstone missile. That's as may be. You mentioned the Brimstone. I'm

:19:48. > :19:50.putting the point that this is not the magical weapon the Government

:19:51. > :19:54.has made it out to be. These are your words and not mine. The asked

:19:55. > :19:59.me in the initial question was there any specific military benefit the

:20:00. > :20:04.edited kingdom -- the United Kingdom can bring. They will bring these

:20:05. > :20:08.missiles. We don't know how many. The Royal Air Force will know and

:20:09. > :20:13.that is enough for me. You say it has a pinpoint capability but we now

:20:14. > :20:18.know that the IS in Raqqa has now disbursed through the buildings.

:20:19. > :20:21.They haven't got headquarters. They have dispersed themselves into the

:20:22. > :20:25.population. The Brimstone missile is irrelevant in that situation. Your

:20:26. > :20:29.conclusion does not match your initial statement. You are assuming

:20:30. > :20:33.that the only bombing that will take place is in Raqqa, areas occupied by

:20:34. > :20:38.civilians. Some of the prime time gets we will be going for, I assume,

:20:39. > :20:41.and I'm sure I'm right, will for example be convoys carrying fuel,

:20:42. > :20:47.convoys carrying munitions that have to go back and forward in northern

:20:48. > :20:52.Iraq. The Americans are doing that already. They took out 180 of them,

:20:53. > :20:57.why does it need the British? We are going to spend a ?100,000 Brimstone

:20:58. > :21:00.missile to take out a fuel tanker? What we are saying is this is an

:21:01. > :21:07.international effort. The United Kingdom does not franchise out the

:21:08. > :21:12.defence of this country. If we see that Isis is a threat to the United

:21:13. > :21:15.Kingdom and there is an international effort approved by the

:21:16. > :21:18.United Nations supported by France, the United States, Russia and a

:21:19. > :21:23.whole host of other countries the idea that the United Kingdom would

:21:24. > :21:26.say let them do it on our behalf because they are making an effort

:21:27. > :21:29.and save the money and do it for another purpose, you don't believe

:21:30. > :21:34.that yourself and neither do most people. Isn't the stronger case that

:21:35. > :21:39.the French have asked us to join them? Mr Hollande made a direct plea

:21:40. > :21:42.to British Parliament, that Mr Obama in the United States would like us

:21:43. > :21:48.to do the same, the King of Jordan has joined this morning, these are

:21:49. > :21:52.our allies, and we would expect them to come to our aid when we needed. .

:21:53. > :21:56.We have a duty to go to their aid when we have asked for it -- they

:21:57. > :22:00.have asked for it? Solidarity is important but as has been said in

:22:01. > :22:08.the debate so far we are doing a lot on the ground to supply whatever the

:22:09. > :22:12.military there is doing, supplying humanitarian aid and we are doing a

:22:13. > :22:19.lot already. It's important that when people look at the whole

:22:20. > :22:25.strategy and situation and people have to be absolutely certain that

:22:26. > :22:30.the political situation is there, the ground forces on the ground are

:22:31. > :22:35.there and the missiles are in place and I don't think everything is in

:22:36. > :22:39.place. Even the Germans, who have for obvious reasons been reluctant

:22:40. > :22:45.to be involved in any military adventures overseas for 70 years are

:22:46. > :22:50.sending the German navy to the eastern Mediterranean, sending 1500

:22:51. > :22:57.troops and they have moved their reconnaissance and satellite

:22:58. > :23:01.capabilities over the area Mr Hollande is asking. Indeed that they

:23:02. > :23:06.are not making air strikes, that's the important distinction. In

:23:07. > :23:10.response to the discussion you had with Malcolm Rifkind earlier, I

:23:11. > :23:15.think I heard on the radio this morning that Isis is moving some of

:23:16. > :23:20.its strategic headquarters to Libya, so what does that mean? Are we

:23:21. > :23:27.supposed to... We have already bombed Libya! Are we supposed to

:23:28. > :23:32.bomb it again? That was my point. It is unlikely we are going to move

:23:33. > :23:38.focus to Libya. The core area of Isas has been northern Iraq and more

:23:39. > :23:40.recently Syria. -- Isis. They have some operations in other countries

:23:41. > :23:44.but that doesn't alter the fact that the so-called caliphate requires to

:23:45. > :23:50.control large amounts of territory to give it credibility. It is only

:23:51. > :23:55.by denying Isis in its heart mind, Syria and northern Iraq, that we

:23:56. > :23:59.will remove the scourge from the problem we face. Is it not

:24:00. > :24:04.inevitable, contrary to what the parliament was asked to vote two

:24:05. > :24:08.years ago that we now have to make common cause with President Assad

:24:09. > :24:14.and the Russians? With the Russians, yes, with Assad no. If the

:24:15. > :24:17.Russians, partly as a result of having lost an aircraft because of

:24:18. > :24:21.the Isis terrorist attack on it, if the Russians are prepared to

:24:22. > :24:25.coordinate, as they say they are with France and presumably other

:24:26. > :24:31.parts of the coalition against Isis, then yes, Russia is a sensible ally.

:24:32. > :24:36.Two or three years ago the Russians helped to remove chemical weapons

:24:37. > :24:39.from Syria and they did it in 24-hour is. Assad was told to go

:24:40. > :24:45.operate with the Russians and he did. That shows the influence the

:24:46. > :24:49.Russians have. Assad goes to the heart of the diplomatic

:24:50. > :24:55.conversations that will have to take place regarding this Syrian Civil

:24:56. > :24:58.War. How can you make common cause with the Russians and not Assad,

:24:59. > :25:03.given he is only there because of the Russians? Assad is not actually

:25:04. > :25:06.fighting Isis. The military conflict between Assad and the Syrian

:25:07. > :25:10.opposition is in other parts of Syria. For his own reasons of

:25:11. > :25:17.self-interest he's happy to leave Isis on touched. How can we be

:25:18. > :25:21.onside with Russia and yet make Assad a deal-breaker, that's not

:25:22. > :25:25.going to work? Assad is not a deal-breaker. You are confusing two

:25:26. > :25:29.separate issues, they are obviously linked at some stage in this ghastly

:25:30. > :25:32.process but they are essentially two issues. There is a question of how

:25:33. > :25:35.to do with the Isis terrorist threat in northern Syria and the quite

:25:36. > :25:41.separate issue, although inevitably it has links, of a political

:25:42. > :25:44.solution, a diplomatic solution to the Syrians of war. Even if Isis

:25:45. > :25:51.disappeared tomorrow the Civil War would continue until there are peace

:25:52. > :25:55.negotiations. So we have a common cause with Russia to deal with the

:25:56. > :25:58.Isis threat from the North. When it comes to the diplomatic solution for

:25:59. > :26:02.the Syrians of a war, that is something which is grindingly slowly

:26:03. > :26:06.making progress, but we have not yet got to the stage of a breakthrough.

:26:07. > :26:10.The Labour leader put a lot of emphasis on the Vienna talks and

:26:11. > :26:12.that there should be some kind of diplomatic negotiated way out of

:26:13. > :26:17.this. With the best will in the world it is hard to see that

:26:18. > :26:21.happening quickly, since it would involve the Assad regime, it would

:26:22. > :26:25.involve the external parties including ourselves, and it would

:26:26. > :26:29.involve all of these militia will stop the only people it wouldn't

:26:30. > :26:33.involve is the Islamic State. At is absolutely right, it is a very slow

:26:34. > :26:36.process and it has been given a timescale of 6-12 months to find a

:26:37. > :26:40.resolution to the problem. It is a slow process and I understand why so

:26:41. > :26:45.much store is put on the political process. We have to do other things

:26:46. > :26:52.in the meantime, such as work with people on the ground. Personally, I

:26:53. > :26:56.think we should be arming the Kurds, for example. I think the Kurds are

:26:57. > :27:02.doing a magnificent job in both Iraq and Syria. But there we get into a

:27:03. > :27:06.complex situation. Perhaps not the British, but the Germans have been

:27:07. > :27:11.helping to arm the Kurds and others have been doing too. Their weapons

:27:12. > :27:14.need to be modernised and so on. I come back to the point I made to

:27:15. > :27:20.Malcolm Rifkind. Even if they were terribly well armed, they have a

:27:21. > :27:23.geo- specific mission. They don't want to go further than the

:27:24. > :27:30.territories around what they regard as Kurdistan. Yes, but I have been

:27:31. > :27:34.talking to some Kurds of late, and I think they may be prepared to go a

:27:35. > :27:38.little further. I think it is worth pursuing these issues. There is an

:27:39. > :27:41.additional point as well, that best remains an area that Isis controls

:27:42. > :27:45.between Raqqa and the Turkish border. The rest of it is controlled

:27:46. > :27:50.by the Kurds. If that particular route could be blocked off, which it

:27:51. > :27:53.ought to be able to without too much military problem, then that is a

:27:54. > :27:58.serious blow to the ability of Isis to get recruits coming through the

:27:59. > :28:03.porous Turkish border. If the Kurds were minded to do more but needed a

:28:04. > :28:08.condition that they wanted a greater Kurdistan recognised that would just

:28:09. > :28:11.create chaos in the region. They will not make that demand because

:28:12. > :28:15.they know it is unrealistic at this moment in time. What they have

:28:16. > :28:18.already achieved by historic standards is an incredible amount of

:28:19. > :28:22.autonomy, both in the Kurdish region of Iraq and increasingly in northern

:28:23. > :28:27.Syria. They will not be pushed out of that area. They know that this

:28:28. > :28:30.will have to be step-by-step if they are going to realise their

:28:31. > :28:35.aspirations. It would throw the cat among the pigeons if the Russians in

:28:36. > :28:39.retaliation for what happened to their jet work to start backing a

:28:40. > :28:46.Kurdistan. The Russians don't have a problem with the Kurds that the

:28:47. > :28:50.Turks do. Exactly. There are lots of curious alliances but we must not

:28:51. > :28:53.lose sight of the main target which is Islamic extremist terrorism which

:28:54. > :28:58.controls a large part of Syria. That is what today is all about, that is

:28:59. > :29:01.why the need for Britain to be part of this international community,

:29:02. > :29:08.which the United Nations resolution gives full authority for, that is

:29:09. > :29:13.something that gives a step forward. Laura Kuenssberg has been across

:29:14. > :29:16.this story from the start. Prime Minister is probably heading for a

:29:17. > :29:23.substantial victory. But it has been a rough 72, 36, 48 hours for him.

:29:24. > :29:28.The terrorists remark at the committee last night, the 70,000

:29:29. > :29:32.troops on the ground figure being widely disparaged. It has not been

:29:33. > :29:35.great. If they held the vote at the end of last week they would

:29:36. > :29:38.certainly have got their numbers at that point in the immediate

:29:39. > :29:41.aftermath of David Cameron making that speech, widely acknowledged to

:29:42. > :29:46.have been very effective and very statesman-like in the House of

:29:47. > :29:49.Commons, particularly in the last 24 hours and overnight there has been a

:29:50. > :29:53.sense of a real scramble, a very tense scramble. On both sides you

:29:54. > :29:59.have had people trying to screw down their supporters. As you say there

:30:00. > :30:02.is a 99.999% chance that the government will get what will feel

:30:03. > :30:07.like a pretty hefty majority on this. But I think there is a sense

:30:08. > :30:13.that as the vote has approached, scrutiny has become more intense,

:30:14. > :30:17.MPs have been agonising over this and in every single political party,

:30:18. > :30:20.we often give MPs a rough ride. In a week like this you see how seriously

:30:21. > :30:27.they take these kinds of decisions. That the case has perhaps become a

:30:28. > :30:31.little bit scratchy around the edges. There is no question about

:30:32. > :30:34.that and as Sir Malcolm referenced, David Cameron will probably feel it

:30:35. > :30:38.would have been better if he had not used the line at the 1922 last night

:30:39. > :30:45.and it was inevitable it would come out. The idea you could say that

:30:46. > :30:47.privately other room of Tory MPs. It is worth remembering, as we

:30:48. > :30:52.discussed in his Conservative Party conference speech, used that line

:30:53. > :30:58.but the campus was so different than pre-Paris and pre-this argument and

:30:59. > :31:05.three being potentially 24 - 36 hours from British jets taking off

:31:06. > :31:14.into the sky. -- canvas. More from the House of Commons now. Shadow

:31:15. > :31:17.Edinburgh secretary is there. We are talking about the arguments that

:31:18. > :31:22.have become much more angry, it feels and much more on the edges, if

:31:23. > :31:26.you like -- energy Secretary. At least 50 or so Labour MPs will vote

:31:27. > :31:27.with the government in favour of air strikes, disappointed by your

:31:28. > :31:37.colleagues who would do that? Not at all. As Laura said, most of

:31:38. > :31:42.us have wrestled hard with this decision. I listened to the Prime

:31:43. > :31:47.Minister last week with an open mind about military action. I was looking

:31:48. > :31:50.for reasons to support him in fact because I accept there is a strong

:31:51. > :31:57.case for taking action in Syria in order to evade Isil and cut them off

:31:58. > :32:01.in their headquarters. But like many of my colleagues, I have come to the

:32:02. > :32:05.conclusion in the last few days that the Prime Minister is not able to

:32:06. > :32:09.provide any kind of concrete strategy about what happens after

:32:10. > :32:13.military air strikes and what happens on the ground. Unless he

:32:14. > :32:17.said something very different in a few minutes time, I'm going to vote

:32:18. > :32:21.against military action because I don't think it will help and

:32:22. > :32:25.potentially, given the lack of clarity about ground troops, it

:32:26. > :32:30.could make it worse. We have discussed the comments of David

:32:31. > :32:34.Cameron last night but Jeremy Corbyn is said to have sparked accusations

:32:35. > :32:37.that he is bullying his MPs by saying there would be no hiding

:32:38. > :32:42.place for those siding with David Cameron. Caroline Flint

:32:43. > :32:49.substantiated reports that she had been targeted on social media and by

:32:50. > :32:51.e-mail by either those in the Parliamentary Labour Party or party

:32:52. > :32:56.members like trying to pressurise MPs to knock back air strikes. What

:32:57. > :33:01.do you say to them? It is right that the debate has become angry and

:33:02. > :33:05.heated and it is a shame because this is not a Black and Whites

:33:06. > :33:09.issue. There are consequences to both action and inaction and I think

:33:10. > :33:15.the point Jeremy was making is that all MPs are to live with their own

:33:16. > :33:17.consciences and go back to the constituencies and look their

:33:18. > :33:20.constituents in the eye and answer them. I have not come under any

:33:21. > :33:26.pressure from anyone about how I vote. He was right to give MPs a

:33:27. > :33:31.free vote on this issue, I would prefer that all MPs had a free vote

:33:32. > :33:34.on this so that Parliament could surface some of these difficult

:33:35. > :33:38.arguments and reach a collective conclusion outside of party

:33:39. > :33:45.politics. We will let you go into the debate because it is starting

:33:46. > :33:48.shortly. It has been fractious, she has not been put under any pressure

:33:49. > :33:54.because she agrees with Jeremy Corbyn. I think in some parts of the

:33:55. > :33:59.Labour Party, fractious is an under estimate. It was a true talk talking

:34:00. > :34:05.to some MPs last night, there is a sense that some of the bonds of

:34:06. > :34:11.trust have been stretched -- it was brutal. It has become extremely

:34:12. > :34:16.intense, stories of bullying. One pro strikes MP recounted an

:34:17. > :34:21.extraordinary exchange with somebody they saw as being in the Corbyn camp

:34:22. > :34:31.who basically said, you start it, we'll finish it. Jeremy Corbyn's

:34:32. > :34:35.office denied this is going on in a deliberate way and that there is any

:34:36. > :34:39.kind of bullying going on but there are many MPs who feel as if there

:34:40. > :34:42.is. This is part of the wider picture of how Jeremy Corbyn wants

:34:43. > :34:47.to involve the membership much more and reach outside Parliament because

:34:48. > :34:54.that is where his power base is. For some MPs, and not all Blairites as

:34:55. > :34:59.they are seen, this is difficult to come back from and this has changed

:35:00. > :35:04.the Labour Party in the last few days, it has become very serious.

:35:05. > :35:09.Let's dip into the House of Commons as it prepares for this debate. As

:35:10. > :35:17.you can seek it is a house, no try ministers questions today. -- Prime

:35:18. > :35:22.Minister's Questions. The benches are full, a big air of anticipation.

:35:23. > :35:27.The Prime Minister will open for the government and give the case as he

:35:28. > :35:31.sees it for extending the RAF bombing from Iraq into Syria and he

:35:32. > :35:35.will be followed by the Leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, who

:35:36. > :35:43.will give the case against doing so. We will bring you both speeches

:35:44. > :35:51.live, full and uninterrupted. We understand that 157 members have put

:35:52. > :35:56.their names down to the speaker requesting to speak in this debate.

:35:57. > :36:00.As Laura was saying, it has been an issue about which MPs have thought

:36:01. > :36:07.long and hard and they have come to their decisions, or perhaps some

:36:08. > :36:09.will only after the debate. One almost unprecedented Parliamentary

:36:10. > :36:13.procedure will take place which is that the Leader of the Opposition

:36:14. > :36:17.will open for the opposition against the motion of the government but the

:36:18. > :36:21.Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn, will close for the opposition

:36:22. > :36:26.and he will be speaking in favour of the motion. I can't remember that

:36:27. > :36:33.happening in my life, even in the days when I was covering Gladstone

:36:34. > :36:38.and Disraeli! It is a big occasion with a lot of MPs wanting to speak

:36:39. > :36:43.on this issue. We understand the Prime Minister is going to speak for

:36:44. > :36:50.quite some time, maybe at 240 minutes, and it could be longer --

:36:51. > :36:54.up to 40 minutes. It could be longer because I imagine he would take a

:36:55. > :36:58.large number of interruptions not just from the Labour side but those

:36:59. > :37:09.on his own side he is yet to convince. And we will also hear from

:37:10. > :37:15.the Scottish Nationalists who will follow. Angus Robertson will speak

:37:16. > :37:19.on their behalf. After the Labour Party, by far the biggest opposition

:37:20. > :37:27.what in Parliament so their voice matters as well. I can't help but

:37:28. > :37:32.notice Hilary Benn sitting there and pondering what is an incredible

:37:33. > :37:37.irony. He is in direct opposition to his leader who of course was one of

:37:38. > :37:42.the strongest adherence of his father's politics. Something very

:37:43. > :37:46.interesting about the two of them. And the brooding presence of Tom

:37:47. > :37:55.Watson who has been such a keep figure in the last few days. -- key

:37:56. > :38:00.figure. Even before a vote has cast, this has stitched the canvas,

:38:01. > :38:04.with big invitations for labour and also for David Cameron. This is his

:38:05. > :38:07.fifth big foreign-policy intervention since being Prime

:38:08. > :38:12.Minister and he is now in a different place. When we discussed

:38:13. > :38:17.the defence review, what ministers say is they believe there should be

:38:18. > :38:20.a new assertiveness in the British attitude to intervening in the rest

:38:21. > :38:25.of the world, that we live in a different place now where the terror

:38:26. > :38:29.threat has modulated and evolved and we must therefore take a different

:38:30. > :38:32.attitude. Although David Cameron wants to take this action and has

:38:33. > :38:39.done for a long time, this is perhaps the start of a new attitude.

:38:40. > :38:44.The beginning of his prime in as the ship was marked by a winding down of

:38:45. > :38:48.operations in Afghanistan. But this will shape him and the Labour Party

:38:49. > :38:54.and of course the SNP and what is going on in Scotland. Hardly a

:38:55. > :38:59.single Scottish MPs will vote for this action. We can go back into the

:39:00. > :39:04.chamber and see what is going on. The debate should have started. It

:39:05. > :39:09.is ten minutes late because they are arguing about whether there should

:39:10. > :39:15.be a two date the bait. The Scottish Nationalists have joined Mr Corbett

:39:16. > :39:28.in asking for that -- eight to date debate -- a two-day debate.

:39:29. > :39:34.There is another point of order taking place. The Scottish

:39:35. > :39:41.Nationalists will be voting with Mr Corbyn on this but I understand the

:39:42. > :39:46.Lib Dems and the DUP are going to side with the government. Indeed and

:39:47. > :39:51.that is one of the reasons why a couple of Tory MPs believe they

:39:52. > :39:55.might win without needing the support of Labour MPs. I think that

:39:56. > :40:03.is optimistic from the government benches, it could be narrow in that

:40:04. > :40:07.situation. But a real change for the Lib Dems. If you think back to the

:40:08. > :40:12.last time there was an occasion like this in Parliament, it was very

:40:13. > :40:15.different, but the Lib Dems build themselves into the mainstream

:40:16. > :40:22.politics through their opposition to the Iraq war. They are now under Mr

:40:23. > :40:27.Farren, who, rightly or wrongly, you would think would be less inclined

:40:28. > :40:31.to support this. What happened? It took them a long time to get to this

:40:32. > :40:35.position, they had hoped for a decision far earlier than when it

:40:36. > :40:36.came at about 9pm last night. The Prime Minister is on his feet as we

:40:37. > :40:44.begin this debate. The question before the house today

:40:45. > :40:49.is how we keep the British people safe from the threat posed by Isil.

:40:50. > :40:55.Let me be clear from the outset. This is not about whether we want to

:40:56. > :40:59.fight terrorism, it is about how best we do that. I respect that

:41:00. > :41:03.governments of all political colours in this country have had to fight

:41:04. > :41:08.terrorism and take the people with them as they do so. I respect people

:41:09. > :41:12.who come to a different view from the government and the one I will

:41:13. > :41:16.set out today and those who vote accordingly and I hope that provides

:41:17. > :41:24.some reassurance to members right across the house. I am happy to give

:41:25. > :41:28.way. I thank the Prime Minister for giving way and he is right in his

:41:29. > :41:32.opening statement to say how important it is to respect opinion

:41:33. > :41:37.on all sides of this house so will the apologise for the marks he made

:41:38. > :41:41.in the meeting last night against Right honourable and honourable

:41:42. > :41:46.friends on this side of the house? I be clearer in my remarks, I respect

:41:47. > :41:51.people who disagree, I respect the fact that governments of all colours

:41:52. > :41:54.have had to fight terrorism and I respect we are all discussing how to

:41:55. > :42:04.fight terrorism, not whether to fight it. In moving this motion,...

:42:05. > :42:11.Mr Speaker... The Prime Minister is clearly not at this stage giving

:42:12. > :42:15.way. He has the floor. I will take dozens of interventions in the time

:42:16. > :42:19.I have, I am conscious of not taking up too much time with similar people

:42:20. > :42:23.wanting to speak I will give way a lot in my speech. Let me make some

:42:24. > :42:28.progress at the start. In moving this motion I am not pretending that

:42:29. > :42:33.the answers are simple. The situation in Syria is incredibly

:42:34. > :42:36.complex. I'm not overstating the contribution that our incredible

:42:37. > :42:40.servicemen and women can make and neither am I ignoring the risks of

:42:41. > :42:46.military action. Nor am I pretending that it is any more than one part of

:42:47. > :42:50.the answer. I am absolutely clear that we must pursue a comprehensive

:42:51. > :42:54.strategy that also includes political, diplomatic and

:42:55. > :42:59.humanitarian action. I know that the long-term solution in Syria, as in

:43:00. > :43:01.Iraq, must ultimately be a government that represents all of

:43:02. > :43:06.its people and one that can work with us to defeat the evil

:43:07. > :43:13.organisation of Isil for good. Notwithstanding all of this, there

:43:14. > :43:18.is a simple question at the heart of the debate today. We face a

:43:19. > :43:23.fundamental threat to our security, Isil have brutally murdered British

:43:24. > :43:27.hostages, inspired the worst terrorist attack against British

:43:28. > :43:32.people since 7-7 on the beaches of Tunisia and plotted atrocity after

:43:33. > :43:36.atrocity on the street here at home. Since November last year our

:43:37. > :43:39.security is that is have foiled no fewer than seven different plots

:43:40. > :43:45.against our people so this threat is very real and the question is this:

:43:46. > :43:49.Do we work with our allies to degrade and destroy this threat and

:43:50. > :43:52.go after these terrorists in with their heartlands from where they

:43:53. > :43:58.plot to kill British people or do we sit back and wait for them to attack

:43:59. > :44:02.us? Thank you for giving way to it would be helpful if he could retract

:44:03. > :44:05.his inappropriate comments from last night but will he be reassured that

:44:06. > :44:13.no one on this side of the house will make a decision based on any

:44:14. > :44:16.such remarks, nor will we be threatened from doing what we

:44:17. > :44:22.believe is the right thing, whether those threats come from online

:44:23. > :44:27.activists or indeed from our own dispatch box? I completely agree

:44:28. > :44:32.with the honourable gentleman, everyone in this house should make

:44:33. > :44:37.up their mind on the arguments in this house and there is honour in

:44:38. > :44:41.voting for and honour in voting against. That is the way this house

:44:42. > :44:45.should operate and that is why I wanted to be absolutely clear at the

:44:46. > :44:49.start of my sentence, this is about how we fight terrorism, not whether

:44:50. > :44:55.we do. I will make some progress and then give way. In answering this

:44:56. > :45:02.question, we should remember that 15 months ago, facing the threat from

:45:03. > :45:07.Isil in Iraq, this house voted 524 to 43 to authorise as drugs in Iraq.

:45:08. > :45:12.Since then our brilliant RAF pilots have helped local forces halt the

:45:13. > :45:16.advance of Isil and recovered 30% of the territory they had captured. On

:45:17. > :45:19.Monday spoke to the president of Iraq in Paris and he expects his

:45:20. > :45:24.better Jude for the vital work our forces are doing and yet when plays

:45:25. > :45:29.reach the border with Syria, a border that Isil themselves do not

:45:30. > :45:33.recognised we can no longer act to defend either his country or hours.

:45:34. > :45:38.Even when we know that their headquarters are in Syria and it is

:45:39. > :45:45.from here that many of the plot against our country are formed.

:45:46. > :45:50.The Prime Minister is facing an amendment signed by 110 members of

:45:51. > :45:56.this house from six different political parties. I've examined

:45:57. > :46:02.that list very carefully and I cannot identify a single terrorist

:46:03. > :46:08.sympathiser on that list. Will he now apologise for his deeply

:46:09. > :46:12.insulting remarks? PRIME MINISTER: I've made clear this is about how we

:46:13. > :46:18.fight terrorism and there is honour in any vote that honourable member

:46:19. > :46:23.is make. We possess the capabilities to reduce this threat to our

:46:24. > :46:28.capability. My argument today is we should not wait any longer before

:46:29. > :46:32.doing so. We should answer the call from our allies. The action we

:46:33. > :46:38.propose is legal, it is necessary and it is the right thing to do to

:46:39. > :46:43.keep our country safe. My strong view is that this house should make

:46:44. > :46:46.clear that we will take up our responsibilities, rather than pass

:46:47. > :46:50.them off and put our own national security in the hands of others. I

:46:51. > :46:55.give way to the member for Stratford-upon-Avon. I've just

:46:56. > :47:00.returned from Baghdad and Irbil, where Isil is on the back foot,

:47:01. > :47:05.Ramadi is surrounded, Sinjar has been liberated. The route between

:47:06. > :47:08.Mosul and Raqqa has been cut off but everyone on the ground tells me that

:47:09. > :47:13.unless we attack Isil in Syria there is no point in liberating Mosul or

:47:14. > :47:17.the rest of Iraq because all they will do with is regrouping Syria and

:47:18. > :47:24.come back and attack that country and our country. PRIME MINISTER: My

:47:25. > :47:28.honourable honourable friend makes an important point and it is set out

:47:29. > :47:31.clearly in the UN Security Council that the fact this so-called

:47:32. > :47:35.caliphate exists in Syria and also Iraq is a direct threat to Iraq and

:47:36. > :47:38.the government of Iraq. He talks about some of the better news there

:47:39. > :47:43.has been from Iraq, I would add to that what has happened in Tikrit

:47:44. > :47:46.since that has been taken from Isil. We have seen 70% of the population

:47:47. > :47:51.returning to that city. Later in the debate I'm sure we will talk about

:47:52. > :47:54.the importance of humanitarian aid and reconstruction. That can only

:47:55. > :47:59.work if you have good government in those towns and the absence of Isil

:48:00. > :48:03.or Daesh in those towns. Let's mix in progress and I will take more

:48:04. > :48:06.interventions, including from the different political parties in this

:48:07. > :48:10.house. Mr Speaker, since my statement last week the House had an

:48:11. > :48:14.opportunity to ask questions of our security experts. I rinsed a

:48:15. > :48:19.briefing for all members as well as more detailed briefings for Privy

:48:20. > :48:22.Council members. I spoke to our allies including President Obama,

:48:23. > :48:25.Chancellor Merkel, President Hollande and beat King of Jordan.

:48:26. > :48:34.The king of Jordan Rhodes in the Telegraph today ex-president his

:48:35. > :48:44.wish for Britain to stand with the Allies in dealing with this threat.

:48:45. > :48:47.The King of Jordan. The stress on post-conflict stabilisation and

:48:48. > :48:50.reconstruction. The importance of standing by our allies. The

:48:51. > :48:55.importance of only targeting Isil. Not deploying ground troops in, it

:48:56. > :48:58.operations. The need to avoid civilian casualties. The importance

:48:59. > :49:01.of ceasefires and a political settlement and a commitment to

:49:02. > :49:04.regular updates to this house. I've drawn these points from across the

:49:05. > :49:08.House and put them in the motion, because I want as many as people as

:49:09. > :49:13.possible to feel able to support this action. I give way to the

:49:14. > :49:21.honourable member for Carshalton. I will be supporting him today. But I

:49:22. > :49:24.do think, however, that he needs to apologise for the comments he made

:49:25. > :49:29.in relation to the Labour Party. Could I ask him very specifically in

:49:30. > :49:34.relation to civilian casualties were UK Government is going to do to

:49:35. > :49:38.minimise those? The honourable gentleman raises an important

:49:39. > :49:41.point. In Iraq for a year and three months there have been no reports of

:49:42. > :49:46.civilian casualties related to the strikes that Britain has taken. Our

:49:47. > :49:50.starting point is to avoid civilian casualties altogether. I have

:49:51. > :49:55.argued, and indeed I will argue again today, that our position

:49:56. > :49:58.weapons and the skill of our pilots makes civilian casualties less

:49:59. > :50:02.likely, so Britain being involved in the strikes in Iraq can both be

:50:03. > :50:08.effective in prosecuting the campaign against Isil, but also can

:50:09. > :50:13.help us to avoid civilian casualties as well. Let me give way to the

:50:14. > :50:17.honourable member for Birkenhead. I'm grateful to the Prime Minister.

:50:18. > :50:22.Is he aware that we have press reports that over the recent past

:50:23. > :50:28.60,000 Syrian troops have been murdered by Isil, and our allies

:50:29. > :50:33.have actually waited to attack until after those murderous acts have

:50:34. > :50:37.taken place. And therefore there is a key part in the motion for many of

:50:38. > :50:45.us, which talks about our action will be exclusively against Isil. If

:50:46. > :50:50.Isil are involved in attacking Syrian government troops, will we be

:50:51. > :50:56.bombing I saw in defence of those troops, or will we wait idly by as

:50:57. > :51:01.our allies have done until now, wait for Isil to kill those troops and

:51:02. > :51:04.then for us to bomb. What I would say to the right honourable

:51:05. > :51:07.gentleman, who I have great respect for, the motion says exclusively

:51:08. > :51:11.Isil because that was a promise I made in this house in response to

:51:12. > :51:16.the points made from both sides of the House. And as far as I'm

:51:17. > :51:20.concerned, were ever Isil are, wherever they can be properly

:51:21. > :51:26.targeted that is what we were should do. -- that is what we should do. It

:51:27. > :51:29.is important will make onto the argument about ground troops, in my

:51:30. > :51:32.discussions with the King of Jordan, he made the point that in

:51:33. > :51:37.the south of Syria there is already cooperation between Jordanian

:51:38. > :51:42.government and the French and Americans and Free Syrian Army, but

:51:43. > :51:46.also there is a growing ceasefire between the regime troops and the

:51:47. > :51:51.Free Syrian Army, so they can turn their guns on Isil. That is what

:51:52. > :51:55.I've said, this is an Isil first strategy. They are the threat, they

:51:56. > :51:59.are the ones we should be targeting and this is about our national

:52:00. > :52:02.security. Let me make some progress and then I will take more

:52:03. > :52:05.interventions. I want to address in my remarks the most important points

:52:06. > :52:10.raised and I will take as many interventions as I can. I believe

:52:11. > :52:13.the key questions raised are these: first, good acting in this way

:52:14. > :52:18.increase the risk to our security by making an attack on Britain more

:52:19. > :52:21.likely? Second, does Britain have the capability to make a significant

:52:22. > :52:25.difference? Third, the question asked by a number of members

:52:26. > :52:28.including the honourable member for Gordon, is why don't we increased

:52:29. > :52:32.the level of our air strikes in Iraq to free up capacity amongst other

:52:33. > :52:46.members of the coalition so they can carry out more air strikes in

:52:47. > :52:49.Syria? Fourth, will they really needed to make this operation a

:52:50. > :52:51.success? Fifth, what is the strategy for defeating Isil and securing a

:52:52. > :52:53.lasting political settlement in Syria? And, six, is there a proper

:52:54. > :52:55.reconstruction host conflict stabilisation plan for Syria? In the

:52:56. > :52:58.time I have available I want to try and answer one of these. Let me give

:52:59. > :53:02.way to the honourable member. I thank the Prime Minister for giving

:53:03. > :53:05.away. He will know how members of the party feel when it comes to

:53:06. > :53:08.fighting and dealing with terrorism. And for that there will always be

:53:09. > :53:12.supporting the matter where terrorism raises its head. Turning

:53:13. > :53:16.to the motion, can I ask the Prime Minister if he can guarantee to the

:53:17. > :53:21.House where he indicates that the Government will not deploying UK

:53:22. > :53:25.troops in ground combat operations if it becomes necessary at a later

:53:26. > :53:30.date to do that. Will he come back to the House to seek approval for

:53:31. > :53:34.that? It is not only something I don't want to do, it is something

:53:35. > :53:39.that I think if we did would be a mistake, because the argument was

:53:40. > :53:44.made to us by the Iraqi government that the presence of Western ground

:53:45. > :53:46.troops, that can be a radicalising force, that can be

:53:47. > :53:50.counter-productive and that is our view. That I would say to him and to

:53:51. > :53:55.colleagues behind him who are concerned about this issue, I accept

:53:56. > :53:58.that this means that our strategy takes longer to be successful

:53:59. > :54:03.because we rely on Iraqi ground troops in Iraq, we rely on the

:54:04. > :54:08.patchwork of Free Syrian Army troops there are in Syria. In time we hope

:54:09. > :54:13.for Syrian ground troops from a transitional regime but that takes

:54:14. > :54:17.longer. One of the killer messages that has to come across today is a

:54:18. > :54:21.yes we have a strategy, it's a convex picture and will take time

:54:22. > :54:24.but we are acting in the right way. Let me make one more point before

:54:25. > :54:29.taking more interventions. Before we get onto these things, Mr Speaker, I

:54:30. > :54:33.want to say a word about the terminology we used to describe this

:54:34. > :54:35.evil death cult. Having considered the representations made to me by

:54:36. > :54:41.the honourable member for chilling and listen to many numbers across

:54:42. > :54:45.the House it's time to join our key I France, the Arab league and other

:54:46. > :54:48.members of the international community in using as frequently as

:54:49. > :54:54.possible the terminology Daesh rather than Isil. This evil death

:54:55. > :54:59.cult is neither a true representative of is that nor is it

:55:00. > :55:04.a state. I'm interested to hear what the honourable gentleman says we

:55:05. > :55:06.should use to talk about Daesh but talking about terminology, should

:55:07. > :55:12.heed not take this opportunity withdraw the remarks that he is

:55:13. > :55:16.calling those not voting with him to note a bunch of terrorist

:55:17. > :55:20.sympathisers? Not only is that offensive, it is dangerous and

:55:21. > :55:24.untrue. I've made my views clear about the importance of all of us

:55:25. > :55:28.fighting terrorism and its time to move on. Let me turn to the

:55:29. > :55:32.important questions, and I will take interventions as I go through these

:55:33. > :55:35.questions. First, could acting increased the risk to our security?

:55:36. > :55:40.This is one of the most important questions we have to answer. Privy

:55:41. > :55:42.councils across the House have had a briefing from the chair of

:55:43. > :55:46.independent joint intelligence committee. Obviously I cannot share

:55:47. > :55:51.all of the classified material that I can say this, Paris wasn't just

:55:52. > :55:54.different because it was so close to us, or because it was so horrific in

:55:55. > :56:00.scale. Paris was different because it showed the extent of terror

:56:01. > :56:05.planning from Daesh in Syria and the approach of sending people back from

:56:06. > :56:09.Syria to Europe. This was, if you like, the head of the snake in Raqqa

:56:10. > :56:13.in action. It is not surprising in my view that the judgment of the

:56:14. > :56:15.chair of the joint intelligence committee and the judgment of the

:56:16. > :56:20.director-general of the security service, is that the risk of a

:56:21. > :56:25.similar attack in the UK is real. And that the UK is already in the

:56:26. > :56:30.top tier of countries on Isil's target list. Let me be frank, Mr

:56:31. > :56:33.Speaker. I want make this point and then I will take more interventions.

:56:34. > :56:37.If there is an attack on the UK in the coming weeks or months there

:56:38. > :56:40.will be those who try and save it has happened because of our trikes.

:56:41. > :56:45.I do not believe that would be the case. Daesh have been trying to

:56:46. > :56:49.attack us for the last year as we know from the seven different plots

:56:50. > :56:54.our security services have foiled -- because of our tax. The terrorist

:56:55. > :56:57.level to the UK was raised to severe last August meaning an attack is

:56:58. > :57:02.highly likely from the threat of Daesh. 800 people, including

:57:03. > :57:05.families and children have been radicalised to such an extent they

:57:06. > :57:10.have travelled to this caliphate. The House should be under no

:57:11. > :57:14.illusion, these terrorists plot to kill us and radicalise our children

:57:15. > :57:22.now. They attack us because of who we are not because of what we do.

:57:23. > :57:25.Thank you, Mr Speaker. On these benches we all share the Prime

:57:26. > :57:33.Minister has Mac horror for Daesh and its death cult, and we abhor

:57:34. > :57:37.terrorism. Will he take the opportunity to identify which

:57:38. > :57:43.members of these benches he regards as terrorist sympathisers? Everyone

:57:44. > :57:48.in this house can speak for themselves. When it comes to the

:57:49. > :57:52.risks of military action, the risks of inaction are far greater than the

:57:53. > :57:56.risks of what I propose. Next, there are those who ask whether Britain

:57:57. > :58:01.conducting strikes in Syria will really make a difference. This is a

:58:02. > :58:04.question that came up. Let me make my argument and then I will take his

:58:05. > :58:08.question. This point has been raised in briefing after briefing. I

:58:09. > :58:12.believe we can make a real difference. I told the House last

:58:13. > :58:16.week about our dynamic targeting, about our Brimstone missile is, the

:58:17. > :58:20.raptor pod on our tornadoes and the intelligence gathering work of our

:58:21. > :58:25.Reaper drones. I will not repeat that today but there is another way

:58:26. > :58:29.to put this which I think is equally powerful. In the coalition there is

:58:30. > :58:32.a lot of strike capacity but when it comes to precision strike

:58:33. > :58:37.capability, whether covering Iraq or Syria, last week the whole

:58:38. > :58:43.international coalition had some 26 aircraft available. Eight of those

:58:44. > :58:46.were British tornadoes, so typically the UK actually represents between a

:58:47. > :58:52.quarter and a third of the international coalition's precision

:58:53. > :58:55.bombing capability and we also have about a quarter of the unmanned

:58:56. > :58:58.strike capability flying in the region. So we have a significant

:58:59. > :59:03.proportion of high precision strike capability. That's why this decision

:59:04. > :59:07.is so important. He's been very persistent and I will give way to

:59:08. > :59:10.the honourable gentleman. He's right to sing the praises of the RAF

:59:11. > :59:18.pilots, and my constituent Mike Poole was tragically killed training

:59:19. > :59:21.for the RAF in a tornado in 2012. He has asked specifically this

:59:22. > :59:26.question. Will be a force in northern Iraq, or is the air force

:59:27. > :59:31.in northern Iraq, and if you go into Syria, does it have coalition

:59:32. > :59:36.warning systems in this crowded airspace? Absolutely essential for

:59:37. > :59:48.the safety of our pilots. The honourable gentleman is right to pay

:59:49. > :59:55.this to -- bring up this issue. In terms of our own aeroplanes they

:59:56. > :00:00.have the most advanced systems to make sure they are kept safe. The

:00:01. > :00:04.argument I was making is one reason why members of the international

:00:05. > :00:07.coalition, including Mr Obama and President Hollande who made these

:00:08. > :00:10.points to me personally, they believe British planes would make a

:00:11. > :00:17.real difference in Syria, just as they are already doing in Iraq. I'm

:00:18. > :00:20.grateful for the Prime Minister giving way. It's important in this

:00:21. > :00:23.debate that there is respect across the House. In the spirit of respect,

:00:24. > :00:29.will the Prime Minister who has been asked before apologise. For the slur

:00:30. > :00:41.put on every member of the opposition last night.

:00:42. > :00:45.Either vote is an honourable vote but I is just we get on with the

:00:46. > :00:50.debate that the country wants to his. I've believe this is to answer

:00:51. > :00:53.the next question that some members have asked about why we do not

:00:54. > :00:58.simply increase our level of air strikes in Iraq to free up other

:00:59. > :01:04.coalition capacity for strikes in Syria. We have the capabilities but

:01:05. > :01:07.other members of the coalition want to benefit from and it makes no

:01:08. > :01:11.sense to stop using these capabilities at a border between

:01:12. > :01:19.Iraq and Syria that IS does not recognise or respect. -- Daesh does

:01:20. > :01:23.not recognise. There was a recent incident in which Syrian opposition

:01:24. > :01:28.forces needed urgent support in the fight against Daesh. British

:01:29. > :01:33.Tornados were eight minutes away over the border in Iraq, no one else

:01:34. > :01:36.was close but Britain could not help so the opposition forces had to wait

:01:37. > :01:42.40 minutes in a perilous situation while other forces were scrambled.

:01:43. > :01:47.That sort of De Laet endangers the lives of those fighting Daesh on the

:01:48. > :01:54.ground and does nothing for our reputation -- that sort of delay. I

:01:55. > :01:59.thank him for giving way. Can he understand that, at a time when too

:02:00. > :02:03.many aircraft are chasing too few targets, what concerns many of us is

:02:04. > :02:10.a lack of com preventive strategy both military and non-military

:02:11. > :02:13.including an exit strategy? One of the fundamental differences between

:02:14. > :02:16.Iraq and Syria is you have nearly a million personnel on the government

:02:17. > :02:23.payroll and still we are having trouble pushing Isil act. 70,000

:02:24. > :02:28.moderates in Syria, quite frankly, we risk forgetting the lesson in

:02:29. > :02:33.Libya. What is his reaction to the decision of the Foreign Affairs

:02:34. > :02:36.Committee yesterday that actually the Prime Minister had not

:02:37. > :02:42.adequately addressed our concerns? Let me answer both questions. The

:02:43. > :02:45.second question is perhaps answered by something I am sure the whole

:02:46. > :02:50.house want to join me in which is wishing the honourable member for

:02:51. > :02:55.Ilford South well given his recent illness, who normally is always at

:02:56. > :03:00.the foreign affairs select committee and voting on the basis of the

:03:01. > :03:05.arguments he believes in. Where we disagree is I believe there is a

:03:06. > :03:11.strategy of which military action is only one part. The key answered his

:03:12. > :03:16.question is that we want to seem a new Syrian transitional government

:03:17. > :03:21.whose troops will then be our allies in squeezing out destroying the

:03:22. > :03:24.so-called caliphate altogether. My disagreement with my honourable

:03:25. > :03:30.friend is that I believe we cannot wait for that to happen, the threat

:03:31. > :03:35.is now, Isil-Daesh are planning attacks now. We can act in Syria as

:03:36. > :03:43.we did in Iraq and in doing so we can enhance the long-term security

:03:44. > :03:46.and safety of our country. I first double thank the Prime Minister for

:03:47. > :03:51.that change into another cheap and all members of Parliament because

:03:52. > :03:58.the house for their support. -- change in terminology. Would he join

:03:59. > :04:05.me in urging the BBC to change their policy of not using the word Daesh

:04:06. > :04:09.because it would breach impartiality rules. We are at war with

:04:10. > :04:15.terrorism, we have to be united, will he join me in urging the BBC to

:04:16. > :04:18.review their bizarre policy? I agree with my honourable friend and I have

:04:19. > :04:24.corresponded with the BBC about their use of IS macro, Islamic

:04:25. > :04:31.State, which I think is even worse than either saying so-called I S or

:04:32. > :04:36.Isil but Daesh is clearly an improvement and it is important we

:04:37. > :04:39.all try to use this language. Let me make some progress and I will give

:04:40. > :04:42.way some more. There is a more fundamental answer as to why we

:04:43. > :04:48.should carry out as drugs in Syria ourselves will stop it is Rakip in

:04:49. > :04:57.Syria that is the HQ of this threat -- carry out air strikes. As I have

:04:58. > :05:01.said, it is in Syria were many of the plots against our country are

:05:02. > :05:05.formed so we must act in Syria to deal with these threats ourselves. I

:05:06. > :05:12.thank him for giving way, I would have preferred an apology but I want

:05:13. > :05:15.to discuss the facts. We proposing to be targeting different things

:05:16. > :05:21.than in northern Iraq and I would like to ask him what practical steps

:05:22. > :05:24.will be used to reduce civilian casualties and what sort of target

:05:25. > :05:28.will will be going against which will reduce the terrorist threat to

:05:29. > :05:33.the UK in terms of operations against our citizens? In terms of

:05:34. > :05:38.the sort of targets we can go after, clearly it is the leaders of this

:05:39. > :05:43.death cult itself, the training camps, the communications hub is,

:05:44. > :05:50.those that are plotting against us. As I will argue, the limited action

:05:51. > :05:57.we took against this dame, has already had an impact on Isil-Daesh

:05:58. > :06:04.and that is an important point -- against Husein. We have a policy of

:06:05. > :06:08.wanting zero civilian casualties. One year and three months into these

:06:09. > :06:14.Iraqi operations, we have not had any reports of civilian casualties.

:06:15. > :06:18.I am not standing here saying that there are no casualties in war, of

:06:19. > :06:22.course there are, this is a very difficult situation will stop it is

:06:23. > :06:28.hugely complex and a difficult argument to get across. But at the

:06:29. > :06:32.heart is a simple point, will we in the long-term be safer and better

:06:33. > :06:36.off if we can get rid of this so-called caliphate which is

:06:37. > :06:43.radicalising Muslims, turning people against us and plotting atrocities

:06:44. > :06:46.on the streets of Britain? I'm grateful to my right honourable

:06:47. > :06:50.friend for giving way. Would he agree with me that there are already

:06:51. > :06:57.hundreds if not thousands of civilian casualties, those who are

:06:58. > :07:03.thrown off ill beans, burned, decapitated, crucified, who have had

:07:04. > :07:14.to flee Syria -- throne of ill doings. -- throne of the holdings.

:07:15. > :07:21.We want to prevent this from carrying out these ghastly axe.

:07:22. > :07:26.Let me to the question of whether there will be ground forces to make

:07:27. > :07:29.this operation a success are a ghastly acts. Those who say there

:07:30. > :07:34.are not as mini ground troops as we like and not in the right places are

:07:35. > :07:39.correct, we are not feeling with an ideal situation. We should be clear

:07:40. > :07:45.what air strikes alone can achieve. We don't need ground troops to

:07:46. > :07:48.target the supply of oil which they used to fund terrorism or to target

:07:49. > :07:52.their headquarters and infrastructure and supply routes and

:07:53. > :07:58.training facilities. It is clear that air strikes can have an effect

:07:59. > :08:02.with the issue of Khan and Hussein. Irrespective of ground forces, the

:08:03. > :08:05.RAF can do serious damage to the bloody right now to bring terror to

:08:06. > :08:11.our streets and we should give them that support

:08:12. > :08:18.our streets and we should give them capability. How would he was born to

:08:19. > :08:23.the point that since the offensive on Baghdad was blunted by air power,

:08:24. > :08:28.it has changed its tactics and disbursed it forces and particularly

:08:29. > :08:33.in Raqqa, has disbursed it operations into small units which

:08:34. > :08:39.make it into this to attacks from our Tornados? I think what he says

:08:40. > :08:46.is absolutely right, of course they have changed tactics. But that is

:08:47. > :08:52.not an argument for doing nothing, it is an argument for using air

:08:53. > :08:55.strikes where you can but having a longer term strategy to deliver the

:08:56. > :09:02.ground troops through the transition you need. The argument is simple, do

:09:03. > :09:07.we wait for perfection which is a transitional government in Syria, or

:09:08. > :09:10.do we start the work now on the grading and destroying this

:09:11. > :09:14.organisation at the request of our allies and the Gulf states on the

:09:15. > :09:22.knowledge from our security experts that it will make a difference? As I

:09:23. > :09:25.said, the full answer to the question of ground forces cannot be

:09:26. > :09:31.achieved until that is a new Syrian government that represent all the

:09:32. > :09:35.people. It is this new government that will be the natural partners

:09:36. > :09:39.for our forces in defeating Daesh for good but there are some ground

:09:40. > :09:45.forces we can work with in the meantime. Last week I told the

:09:46. > :09:51.house, let me give the explanation, we believe there are around 70,000

:09:52. > :09:55.Syrian opposition fighters who do not belong to extremist groups and

:09:56. > :09:59.with whom we can coordinate attacks on Daesh. The house will appreciate

:10:00. > :10:03.there are some limits on what I can say about them, not least that I

:10:04. > :10:10.cannot risk their safety, who are being targeted daily by the resume

:10:11. > :10:16.or Daesh or both. This is an area of great interest and concern so let me

:10:17. > :10:19.say a little more. The 70,000 is a tent -- estimate from our

:10:20. > :10:23.independent joint intelligence committee based on a detailed

:10:24. > :10:27.analysis updated daily and drawing on a wide range of open source and

:10:28. > :10:33.intelligence. Of these, the majority are from the free Syrian army.

:10:34. > :10:38.Alongside the 70,000 there are some 20,000 Kurdish fighters with whom we

:10:39. > :10:44.can also work. I am not arguing, this is crucial, that all of these

:10:45. > :10:50.70,000 art somehow ideal partners. Some left the Syrian army because of

:10:51. > :10:56.the brutality of Assad and they can play a role in the future of Syria.

:10:57. > :11:03.That is a view taken by the Russians as well who are prepared to talk

:11:04. > :11:08.with these people. I thank him for giving way and the helpful way he

:11:09. > :11:11.has helped colleagues from across the house he spoke about a long-term

:11:12. > :11:15.strategy and a new government in Syria and there is wide agreement on

:11:16. > :11:19.that but possibly more of a challenge with Russia so can he

:11:20. > :11:24.update the house on, say should he has had with President Putin as to

:11:25. > :11:30.the short and longer term prospects for President Assad? I have had

:11:31. > :11:36.these conversations with President Putin on many occasions, most

:11:37. > :11:39.recently in Antalya. Barack Obama had a meeting with him at the

:11:40. > :11:44.climate change conference in Paris. There was an enormous gap between

:11:45. > :11:51.written, America and Saudi Arabia and Russia on the other hand --

:11:52. > :11:55.Britain. We wanted Assad to go instantly, they wanted him to stay

:11:56. > :11:58.at that gap has narrowed and it will narrow further as these vital talks

:11:59. > :12:04.in Vienna get underway. And a point about these talks are some people

:12:05. > :12:08.worry it is a process without an end but the clear ambition of the talks

:12:09. > :12:12.is for a transitional government within six months and a new

:12:13. > :12:16.constitution and fresh sections within 18 months so there is a real

:12:17. > :12:20.momentum behind these talks. That require fresh elections.

:12:21. > :12:28.Was he confirmed the house that alongside any military intervention

:12:29. > :12:31.in Syria that may be authorised to night he remains completely

:12:32. > :12:38.committed to the huge F at which has kept so many people alive by this

:12:39. > :12:41.government in that region? -- the huge humanitarian effort.

:12:42. > :12:48.We will be keeping that other not least with the vital conference in

:12:49. > :12:51.London next year when we will bring together the whole world to make

:12:52. > :12:59.sure we fill the gap in the funding that has not been available. He is

:13:00. > :13:03.presenting his case well, if he had come to the house and asked for a

:13:04. > :13:06.narrow licence to take out Isil's external planning capability and

:13:07. > :13:10.think it would have commanded widespread consent but he is asking

:13:11. > :13:14.for a wider authority and I want to draw him on the difference between

:13:15. > :13:21.Iraq and Syria. There are ground forces in place in Iraq but not in

:13:22. > :13:26.Syria. Can he say more about what ground forces he envisages joining

:13:27. > :13:31.us in the seizure of Raqqa? This goes to the nub of the difficulty of

:13:32. > :13:37.this case. I don't think you can separate taking out the command and

:13:38. > :13:45.control of Isil's operations against the UK or France or elsewhere from

:13:46. > :13:52.the task of degrading and destroying the Daesh caliphate they have

:13:53. > :13:58.created. They are intricately linked and as I argued last week, as long

:13:59. > :14:02.as this so-called caliphate exists, it is a threat to us, not least

:14:03. > :14:06.because it is radicalising Muslims from across the world who are going

:14:07. > :14:11.to fight for that organisation and potentially returning to attack us.

:14:12. > :14:15.On his second question about ground troops, as I explained, there are

:14:16. > :14:19.three parts to this. The things we can do without ground troops, don't

:14:20. > :14:22.underestimate them. The ground could that are there, not ideal, not as

:14:23. > :14:25.men it is radicalising Muslims from across the world who are going to

:14:26. > :14:27.fight for that organisation and potentially returning to attack us.

:14:28. > :14:29.On his second question about ground troops, as I explained, there are

:14:30. > :14:31.three parts to this. The things we can do without ground troops, don't

:14:32. > :14:34.underestimate them. The ground could that are there, not ideal, not as

:14:35. > :14:37.men as we and can work with. The real plan is, as you get a

:14:38. > :14:39.transitional government in Syria that can represent all the Syrian

:14:40. > :14:42.people, there will be more ground troops for us to work with two

:14:43. > :14:45.defeat Daesh and the caliphate which will keep our country safe. I know

:14:46. > :14:48.that takes a long time and it is complex but that is the strategy

:14:49. > :14:52.that we need to start with the first step which is going after these

:14:53. > :14:59.terrorists today. I'm grateful but I think he has to acknowledge that the

:15:00. > :15:02.ground troops which we can work with will be essential for his long-term

:15:03. > :15:08.strategy and at the moment he has not shown to me that, as the defeat

:15:09. > :15:13.Isil, we create a vacuum into which Assad will move and we must fight

:15:14. > :15:19.and other enemy. And the final word, can I give him some motherly advice?

:15:20. > :15:25.If he just got up and said, whoever does not walk with me through the

:15:26. > :15:26.division lobbies is not a terrorist sympathiser, he would improve his

:15:27. > :15:35.standing in this house enormously. I'm very happy to repeat what she

:15:36. > :15:37.said. People who vote in either division lobby do so with honour, I

:15:38. > :15:44.couldn't have been more clear about that. What I would say to her, is if

:15:45. > :15:48.she is saying there are not enough ground troops she's right, if she is

:15:49. > :15:52.saying they are not always in the right places she's right. But the

:15:53. > :15:56.question is, should we act now in order to try and start to turn the

:15:57. > :16:01.tide? Let me make some progress. I will give way to the leader of the

:16:02. > :16:04.SNP in a moment. I want to be clear about the 70,000. That figure

:16:05. > :16:09.doesn't include a further 25,000 extremist fighters in groups which

:16:10. > :16:14.reject political participation and reject coordination with

:16:15. > :16:19.non-Muslims. So, although they fight plaice they cannot and will not be

:16:20. > :16:22.our partners. So, Mr Speaker, there are ground forces that will take the

:16:23. > :16:31.fight to Daesh and in many cases we can work with them and assist them.

:16:32. > :16:35.If we don't act now we should be clear there will be even fewer

:16:36. > :16:40.ground forces over time as Daesh will get even stronger. In my view

:16:41. > :16:46.we simply cannot afford to wait, we have to act now. I give way to the

:16:47. > :16:50.leader of the SNP. I'm grateful for the leader for giving way. Would he

:16:51. > :16:53.clarified for every Member of the House the advice he has been given

:16:54. > :16:58.and others have been given in race into the forces of 70,000? How many

:16:59. > :17:04.are classified as moderate and how many are classified as on the

:17:05. > :17:07.mentalists we could never work with? On the 70,000, the advice I have is

:17:08. > :17:12.that the majority are made up of Free Syrian Army. But of course the

:17:13. > :17:16.Free Syrian Army has different leadership in different parts of the

:17:17. > :17:22.country. 70,000 excludes those extremist groups like al-Nusra that

:17:23. > :17:26.we will not work with. But as I said very clearly I'm not arguing that

:17:27. > :17:31.the 70,000 are ideal partners. Some of them do have views that we don't

:17:32. > :17:35.agree with. But the definition of the 70,000 is those people that we

:17:36. > :17:38.have been prepared to work with and continue to be prepared to work

:17:39. > :17:43.with. Let me make this point again, if we don't take action against

:17:44. > :17:50.Daesh now, the number of ground forces we can work with will get

:17:51. > :17:53.less and less. If we want to end up with a situation where you have the

:17:54. > :17:58.butcher Assad on one side and a stronger Isil on the other side, not

:17:59. > :18:02.acting is one of the things that will bring that about. I give way to

:18:03. > :18:07.my honourable honourable friend. I know from my time in government

:18:08. > :18:10.how long, hard and I just be the Prime Minister thinks about these

:18:11. > :18:16.questions. But, will he ensure that we complete the military aspect of

:18:17. > :18:20.this military campaign so that we can get onto the really but perhaps

:18:21. > :18:23.most ethical aspect of the questions he has posed, the post-conflict

:18:24. > :18:28.stabilisation and reconstruction of Syria? Without this early stage

:18:29. > :18:32.there will not be a Syria to reconstruct? I think my Right

:18:33. > :18:35.Honourable honourable friend who always thought about these things

:18:36. > :18:40.carefully is right. That is the end goal. We shouldn't take our eyes off

:18:41. > :18:44.the prize, which is a reconstructed Syria that can represent all the

:18:45. > :18:48.people, a Syria at peace so we don't have the migration crisis, the

:18:49. > :18:52.terrorism crisis, that's the goal. Let me return to the overall

:18:53. > :19:00.strategy. I set this out in the House last week. Counterterrorism,

:19:01. > :19:02.counter extremism, political and diplomatic processes and vital

:19:03. > :19:06.humanitarian work my Right Honourable honourable friend

:19:07. > :19:09.referred to. Our counterterrorism strategy gives Britain can Prince of

:19:10. > :19:13.plan to prevent and foil plots at home and also prevent deep poisonous

:19:14. > :19:18.extremist ideology that is the root cause of the threat we face. I can

:19:19. > :19:22.announce we will establish a comprehensive review to root out any

:19:23. > :19:26.remaining funding of extremism within the UK. This will examine

:19:27. > :19:31.specifically the nature, scale and origin of the funding of Islamist

:19:32. > :19:34.extremism activity in the UK, including any overseas sources. It

:19:35. > :19:38.will report to myself and Right Honourable honourable friend the

:19:39. > :19:42.Home Secretary next spring. I want to make this point before giving

:19:43. > :19:48.way. There are some who express military action is in some way

:19:49. > :19:51.capable of undermining our counter extremism strategy by radicalising

:19:52. > :19:59.British Muslims. Let me tackle this head on, British Muslims are

:20:00. > :20:01.appalled by Daesh. These women rake raping, murderous monsters are

:20:02. > :20:09.hijacking the peaceful religion of Islam for their ends. As the King of

:20:10. > :20:12.Jordan says, these people are not Muslims, they are outlaws from

:20:13. > :20:15.Islamabad must stand without Muslim Friends of Labour and around the

:20:16. > :20:21.world as they reclaim their religion from beast terrorists. Far from an

:20:22. > :20:27.attack on Islam, we are engaged in a defence of Islam. And far from the

:20:28. > :20:30.risk of radicalising British Muslims by acting, failing to act would be

:20:31. > :20:40.to betray British Muslims and the wider religion of Islam in its very

:20:41. > :20:46.hour of need. The Prime Minister said that they would fight all the

:20:47. > :20:50.time in this country. Why don't the Iranians, the Saudis, the Turks, why

:20:51. > :20:57.do they not fight these people? Why has it always got to be us who fight

:20:58. > :21:01.them? The Turks are taking part in this action and urging us to do the

:21:02. > :21:05.same. The Saudis are taking part in this action and urging us to do the

:21:06. > :21:10.same. The Jordanians have taken part in this action and urge us to do the

:21:11. > :21:13.same. I have here quote after quote from leader after leader in the Gulf

:21:14. > :21:18.world making and pleading with Britain to take part to take the

:21:19. > :21:23.fight to this death cult that threatens us all so much. The second

:21:24. > :21:26.part of the strategy is support for the diplomatic and political

:21:27. > :21:30.process. Let me say a word about how this process can lead to ceasefires

:21:31. > :21:34.between the regime and opposition so essential for the next stages of

:21:35. > :21:40.this political transition. It begins with identifying the right people to

:21:41. > :21:43.put around the table. We expect a Syrian Bell a team of people to

:21:44. > :21:47.negotiate under the auspices of the United Nations. Over the last 18

:21:48. > :21:53.months political and armed opposition have confirmed Eddie

:21:54. > :21:56.Macken the -- have converged and we will arrange a meeting for

:21:57. > :21:59.opposition representatives in Riyadh and the United Nations will take

:22:00. > :22:03.forward discussions on steps towards a ceasefire, including at the next

:22:04. > :22:08.meeting of the international Syrian support group that we expect to take

:22:09. > :22:11.place before Christmas. The aim is clear, a transitional government

:22:12. > :22:14.within six months, the new constitution and free elections

:22:15. > :22:18.within 18 months, so I would argue that the key elements of a deal are

:22:19. > :22:23.emerging. Ceasefires, opposition groups coming together, the regime

:22:24. > :22:28.looking at negotiation, the key players, America, Russia, Saudi

:22:29. > :22:34.Arabia and Iran and Chiriches no players -- key regional players like

:22:35. > :22:40.Turkey. Negotiation helps this process which is the eventual goal.

:22:41. > :22:45.Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the murders on the beach in

:22:46. > :22:50.Tunisia and the carnage in Paris on the 13th of November changes

:22:51. > :22:55.everything. And British people would find it rather odd that it would

:22:56. > :22:59.take something more than that for Britain to stand shoulder to

:23:00. > :23:03.shoulder with a number of other countries and take on Daesh? My

:23:04. > :23:09.honourable honourable friend speaks for many of us, they attack us for

:23:10. > :23:14.who we are, not because of what we do and they want to attack us again

:23:15. > :23:18.and again. Do we answer the call of our allies, some of our closest

:23:19. > :23:22.friends in the world, the French and Americans, who want us to join with

:23:23. > :23:26.them and their Arab partners in this work, or do we ignore the call? And

:23:27. > :23:31.if we ignore the call, think what that says about Britain as an ally.

:23:32. > :23:34.Inc what it says to the countries in the region who ask themselves if

:23:35. > :23:40.Britain won't come to the aid of France, it's neighbour in these

:23:41. > :23:45.circumstances, just how reliable neighbour, honourable friend and

:23:46. > :23:50.ally this country is. Let me talk about humanitarian relief and longer

:23:51. > :23:55.term stabilisation. I said last week the report for refugees in the

:23:56. > :23:58.region and the extra ?1 billion we have committed to Syria's

:23:59. > :24:03.reconstruction and the broad international alliance we would work

:24:04. > :24:06.with in the rebuilding phase. But Mr Speaker, let us be clear and my

:24:07. > :24:10.honourable honourable friend for Dorset North made this clear, people

:24:11. > :24:14.will not return to Syria if part of it is under the control of an

:24:15. > :24:17.organisation that enslaves Yazidis, throws gay people off buildings,

:24:18. > :24:22.behead aid workers and forces children to marry before they are

:24:23. > :24:27.even ten years old. We cannot separate the humanitarian work and

:24:28. > :24:33.the reconstruction work from dealing with Daesh itself. I'm grateful for

:24:34. > :24:39.the Prime Minister for giving way and welcome any comments that

:24:40. > :24:43.distance British Muslims and Muslims in Scotland from Daesh and I welcome

:24:44. > :24:47.the use of that terminology. I ask the question as a new Member of the

:24:48. > :24:51.House, looking to seasoned Parliamentary members who have been

:24:52. > :24:54.in the House for some time as new members do on such occasions. Given

:24:55. > :25:01.the language used would be seen as unbecoming of a parliamentarian, for

:25:02. > :25:03.the benefit of new members would the Prime Minister withdraw his remarks

:25:04. > :25:08.in relation to terrorist sympathisers? What I would say is I

:25:09. > :25:12.think everyone is focused on the main issues in front of us and that

:25:13. > :25:35.is what we should be focusing on. Let me turn to the plan for

:25:36. > :25:37.post-conflict reconstruction to support a new Syrian government when

:25:38. > :25:39.it emerges. I've said we would be prepared to commit ?1 billion to

:25:40. > :25:41.Syria's reconstruction. The initial priorities would be protection,

:25:42. > :25:42.security, stabilisation and confidence building measures,

:25:43. > :25:44.including meeting basic humanitarian needs such as education, health and

:25:45. > :25:47.shelter and helping refugees to return. Over time the focus would

:25:48. > :25:48.shift, the longer term rebuilding of Syria's shattered infrastructure,

:25:49. > :25:50.harnessing the expertise of the international financial institutions

:25:51. > :25:53.and the private sector. As I said last week, we're not in the business

:25:54. > :25:58.of trying to dismantle the Syrian state or its institutions. We would

:25:59. > :26:02.aim to allocate reconstruction funds against a plan agreed between a new

:26:03. > :26:04.inclusive Syrian government and the international community wants the

:26:05. > :26:09.conflict had ended. That is the absolute key. I will take the

:26:10. > :26:15.honourable member here and there and bring it to a close. Prime Minister,

:26:16. > :26:18.what matters to my constituents is whether they will be safer after

:26:19. > :26:21.this process has taken place. He's making a strong case that we are

:26:22. > :26:26.attacking the heart of this terrorist organisation. Will he

:26:27. > :26:30.assure the House, as well as taking action in Syria, you will also shore

:26:31. > :26:34.up services, security services and policing, in the United Kingdom?

:26:35. > :26:38.That is what our constituents want to know. What are we doing to

:26:39. > :26:41.strengthen our borders, what are we doing to exchange intelligence

:26:42. > :26:45.information across Europe? What are we doing to strengthen intelligence

:26:46. > :26:51.and policing agencies which the Chancellor spoke about last week.

:26:52. > :26:57.All of this we should see through the prism of international security.

:26:58. > :27:00.When you have the knowledge you can make a difference I believe we

:27:01. > :27:04.should act. Let me take an intervention from the leader of the

:27:05. > :27:11.Liberal Democrats. He rightly makes the point how important it is we are

:27:12. > :27:14.seen to stand with our friends and allies in Europe. However, the Prime

:27:15. > :27:19.Minister has not so fast and with those European allies on the matter

:27:20. > :27:24.of taking our fair share of refugees from this crisis and others. Would

:27:25. > :27:27.he look again at the save the children request that this country

:27:28. > :27:32.takes 3000 orphaned children, refugees currently in Europe? I

:27:33. > :27:36.would say we have played a huge part in Europe as the biggest bilateral

:27:37. > :27:43.donor. No other European country has given as much as Britain has and we

:27:44. > :27:46.will take 20,000 refugees with 1000 arriving by Christmas. I'm happy to

:27:47. > :27:50.look once again at the issue of orphans. I think it is better to

:27:51. > :27:55.take orphans from the region rather than those who come over with

:27:56. > :28:00.sometimes extended family. I'm very happy to look at that again, both in

:28:01. > :28:04.Europe and out of Europe, to see if Britain can do more to fulfil our

:28:05. > :28:10.moral responsibilities. Mr Speaker, let me conclude, this is not 2003.

:28:11. > :28:15.We must not use past mistakes as an excuse for indifference or in

:28:16. > :28:19.action. Let's be clear, Mr Speaker, in action does not amount for a

:28:20. > :28:22.strategy for our security or the Syrian people. But in action is a

:28:23. > :28:27.choice. I believe it's the wrong choice. We face a clear threat and

:28:28. > :28:31.we have listened to our allies. We have taken legal advice. We have a

:28:32. > :28:36.unanimous United Nations resolution and discussed action extensively at

:28:37. > :28:41.meetings of the Security Council and cabinet and I've responded

:28:42. > :28:43.personally to the report of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and

:28:44. > :28:48.we have a proper motion before the House and we have a ten hour debate

:28:49. > :28:51.today. I look forward to the rest of the debate and listening to

:28:52. > :28:56.contributions of members on all sides of this House. But at the end

:28:57. > :29:02.of it all I hope the House will come together at in large numbers so that

:29:03. > :29:06.Britain will defeat these evil extremists and take the action

:29:07. > :29:09.needed now to keep the country safe. I pay tribute to the extraordinary

:29:10. > :29:14.bravery in service of our inspirational Armed Forces who will

:29:15. > :29:17.once again put themselves in harms way to protect our values and our

:29:18. > :29:25.way of life and I commend this motion to the House.

:29:26. > :29:34.The question is motion number two, I call the leader of the opposition,

:29:35. > :29:52.Mr Jeremy Corbyn. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

:29:53. > :30:01.Shouldn't brought before the house today by the government faces us

:30:02. > :30:04.with exacting that decision. It is one with potentially far-reaching

:30:05. > :30:10.consequences for us all, Hitler in written as well as the people of

:30:11. > :30:16.civic -- here in Britain as well as the people of Syria. Taking a

:30:17. > :30:21.decision that would put British servicemen and women in harm 's way

:30:22. > :30:24.and would almost inevitably lead to the death of innocents is a heavy

:30:25. > :30:29.responsibility and it must be treated with the utmost seriousness

:30:30. > :30:35.and respect given to those who make a different judgment about the right

:30:36. > :30:39.course of action to take. That is why the Prime Minister's attempt to

:30:40. > :30:44.brand those who planned to vote against the government as terrorist

:30:45. > :30:51.sympathisers both demeans the office of the Prime Minister and I believe

:30:52. > :30:55.undermines the seriousness of the deliberations we are having. If he

:30:56. > :30:57.now wants to apologise for those remarks, I would be happy to give

:30:58. > :31:12.way to him to do so. Since the Prime Minister is unmoved,

:31:13. > :31:22.we will have to move on with the debate and I hope... He will be

:31:23. > :31:26.stronger later to recognise that, yes, he did make an unfortunate

:31:27. > :31:29.remark last night and apologising for it would be very helpful to

:31:30. > :31:40.improve the atmosphere of this debate. I thank my honourable friend

:31:41. > :31:43.for giving way. As he is appropriately pointing out that the

:31:44. > :31:48.Prime Minister is not showing leadership by not withdrawing his

:31:49. > :31:54.slur on me and others, would he also agreed there is no place whatsoever

:31:55. > :31:59.in the Labour Party for anybody who has been abusing those members of

:32:00. > :32:06.the parties who choose to vote with the government on this resolution?

:32:07. > :32:12.-- of the party. Abuse has no part in responsible, Democratic political

:32:13. > :32:16.dialogue, I believe very strongly in that and that is the way I wish to

:32:17. > :32:20.conduct myself and I wish others to conduct themselves. I'm very

:32:21. > :32:25.grateful to my right honourable friend for giving way. Would he

:32:26. > :32:33.agreed that if the Prime Minister came to the dispatch box and made a

:32:34. > :32:36.clear apology, he would clear the air immediately and we could move on

:32:37. > :32:45.in this debate with a simple, I'm sorry? As he often does on these

:32:46. > :32:49.occasions, he appears to be taking advice from the Chancellor of the

:32:50. > :32:53.Exchequer on this matter. If he wants to apologise, that's fine, if

:32:54. > :32:59.he doesn't, the whole world can note he is not apologising. Since the

:33:00. > :33:03.Prime Minister first made his case for extending British bombing to

:33:04. > :33:07.Syria last week, the doubts and unanswered questions then expressed

:33:08. > :33:12.on both sides of the house have only grown and multiplied. That is why it

:33:13. > :33:16.is a matter of such concern that the government has decided to push this

:33:17. > :33:22.vote through Parliament today. It would have been far better to allow

:33:23. > :33:27.a full two day debate that would have given all members the chance to

:33:28. > :33:31.a proper contribution and you yourself, Mr Speaker, informed us

:33:32. > :33:41.that 157 have applied to speak in this debate. I'm grateful to him for

:33:42. > :33:45.giving way. We have worked together on the Kurdish issue, he knows how

:33:46. > :33:52.tough the Kurds are finding it fighting Isil in Iraq and Syria. His

:33:53. > :33:57.Shadow Foreign Secretary believes the four conditions debated at the

:33:58. > :34:01.Labour Party conference for taking action in Syria have been met, why

:34:02. > :34:06.does he disagree? He may have to wait a few moments to hear that but

:34:07. > :34:10.it will be in my speech, I can promise him Ulster I'm pleased he'd

:34:11. > :34:14.made the intervention in respect of the Kurdish people because at some

:34:15. > :34:18.point, over the whole of the Middle East and this is that the mud, that

:34:19. > :34:19.has to be a recognition of the rights of Kurdish people, in

:34:20. > :34:34.whichever country they live. I thank him for giving way. I'm glad

:34:35. > :34:42.he has mentioned the Kurds. Could he be clear that he or anyone on this

:34:43. > :34:46.bench in no way will want to remove the air protection which was voted

:34:47. > :34:52.on with an overwhelming majority in the house 14 months ago? I thank him

:34:53. > :35:00.for the intervention, it is not part of the motion today so we move on

:35:01. > :35:05.with this debate. It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the

:35:06. > :35:10.Prime Minister understands that public opinion is moving

:35:11. > :35:18.increasingly against what I believe to be an ill thought out rush to

:35:19. > :35:24.walk. He wants to hold this vote before opinion grows further against

:35:25. > :35:28.him -- rush to war. Whether it is a lack of strategy, the absence of

:35:29. > :35:31.credible ground troops, the missing the Mitic plan for a Syrian

:35:32. > :35:36.settlement, the failure to address the impact of the terrorist threat

:35:37. > :35:41.or the refugee crisis and civilian casualties, it is becoming clear

:35:42. > :35:48.that the Prime Minister's proposal for military action simply do not

:35:49. > :35:53.stack up. And grateful to him for giving way and I agree that the case

:35:54. > :35:56.has not been put for this. Under these circumstances, and the slur

:35:57. > :36:00.that has been put on the opposition benches, whether or not he will

:36:01. > :36:04.reconsider that it is important that the Labour Party in its entirety

:36:05. > :36:08.joins with these ventures on opposing the government to make sure

:36:09. > :36:18.this government is defeated on this motion? Every MP as to make a

:36:19. > :36:22.decision today, every MP has a vote today, every MP has a constituency

:36:23. > :36:26.and they should be aware of what constituents and public opinion is

:36:27. > :36:30.and they will make up their own mind. Obviously I am proposing we do

:36:31. > :36:34.not support the motion of the government and I would encourage all

:36:35. > :36:42.colleagues on all sides to join me in the opposition lobby tonight.

:36:43. > :36:46.Last week the Prime Minister focused his case for bombing in Syria on the

:36:47. > :36:51.critical tests set by the very respected cross-party foreign

:36:52. > :36:55.affairs select committee. Given the holes in their case to it is

:36:56. > :37:00.scarcely surprising that last night the committee reported the Prime

:37:01. > :37:09.Minister had not, "adequately addressed their concerns." In other

:37:10. > :37:14.words, the committee judged that the Prime Minister's case for bombing

:37:15. > :37:19.has failed its tests. I'm grateful to the right and noble gentleman.

:37:20. > :37:23.That the committee resolved 4-3 that the prime Minster has not adequately

:37:24. > :37:26.addressed concerned in the second report with the absence of his

:37:27. > :37:33.honourable friends for a dinner in Valley and Ilford South, who would

:37:34. > :37:39.have resisted that motion, but it is on a narrow point where logically it

:37:40. > :37:42.is all most impossible for the Prime Minister to adequately meet those

:37:43. > :37:48.concerned given the fact he is not in a position to produce sufficient

:37:49. > :37:59.detail to set aside some of my colleagues. It is a very weak point

:38:00. > :38:03.for him to rely on. I thank him for his intervention and we have often

:38:04. > :38:08.had amicable discussions on many of these issues and I am sure we will

:38:09. > :38:11.again. The fact is that at a meeting of the foreign affairs select

:38:12. > :38:17.committee, there was a verdict and that the Prime Minister had not

:38:18. > :38:20.adequately addressed the concerns. Obviously I understand there are

:38:21. > :38:28.differences of opinion, there are plenty all around this house. Your

:38:29. > :38:32.benches and these. I ask the chair of the select committee to recognise

:38:33. > :38:39.that a decision has been made by his committee. After the despicable and

:38:40. > :38:44.horrific attacks in Paris last month, the question of whether the

:38:45. > :38:48.government's proposals for military action in Syria strengthens or

:38:49. > :38:52.undermines our own national security must be at the centre of our

:38:53. > :39:00.deliberations. There is no doubt that the so-called Islamic State

:39:01. > :39:04.group, I had given way quite a lot already, there are 157 members who

:39:05. > :39:08.wish to take part in this debate so I think I should try to move on and

:39:09. > :39:14.speed it up slightly which appears to meet with your approval. There is

:39:15. > :39:18.no doubt that the so-called Islamic State has imposed a reign of

:39:19. > :39:23.sectarian and inhumane terror in Iraq, Syria, and Libya, and that it

:39:24. > :39:27.also poses a threat to our own people. The issue now is whether it

:39:28. > :39:33.is whether it's ending British bombing from Iraq to Syria is likely

:39:34. > :39:37.to reduce or increase that threat to Britain and whether it will counter

:39:38. > :39:42.or spread the terror campaign Isil is waging across the Middle East.

:39:43. > :39:48.The answers don't make the case for the government motion. On the

:39:49. > :39:52.contrary, they are warning to step back. A vote against yet another

:39:53. > :39:57.ill-fated twist in this never-ending war on terror Ulster that start with

:39:58. > :40:02.the military dimension. The prime Minster has been unable to explain

:40:03. > :40:08.why extending extract to Syria will make a significant literary impact

:40:09. > :40:15.on the existing campaign. Isil is already being bombed by Syria, the

:40:16. > :40:21.US, France, Britain and Russia and other powers. Canada has withdrawn

:40:22. > :40:27.from this campaign and no longer takes part in it. During more than a

:40:28. > :40:34.year bombing, Isil has expanded and lost territory, they gained include

:40:35. > :40:38.it Ramadi and the Syrian city of polymer. The claim that superior

:40:39. > :40:41.British missiles would make a difference is hard to credit when

:40:42. > :40:48.the US and other states, as an intervention said earlier, are

:40:49. > :40:51.struggling to find suitable targets. In other words, extending British

:40:52. > :40:58.bombing is unlikely to make a huge difference. Secondly, the Prime

:40:59. > :41:03.Minister has failed to convince almost anyone that even if British

:41:04. > :41:08.participation in the air campaign were to tip the balance, there are

:41:09. > :41:14.credible ground forces able to take back territory now held by Isil. In

:41:15. > :41:18.fact, it is quite clear there are no such forces. Last week the Prime

:41:19. > :41:24.Minister suggested that a combination of Kurdish militias, the

:41:25. > :41:31.free Syrian army, able to fill the gap. He even claimed a 70,000 strong

:41:32. > :41:38.force of moderate FS a fighters were ready to coordinate action against

:41:39. > :41:42.Isil with the Western air campaign. That claim has not remotely stood up

:41:43. > :41:52.to scrutiny. Kurdish forces are a distance away in areas where Isil

:41:53. > :41:57.controls. The FSA include a wide range of groups and few if any would

:41:58. > :42:00.regard as moderate and mostly operate in other parts of the

:42:01. > :42:06.country. The only ground forces able to take advantage of a successful

:42:07. > :42:13.anti-Isil air campaign are stronger jihadist groups close to the Isil

:42:14. > :42:17.controlled areas. I think these are serious issues that we need to think

:42:18. > :42:22.through carefully all stop I believe that is what the Prime Minister's

:42:23. > :42:28.bombing campaign could lead to. This is why the logic... I will give

:42:29. > :42:32.weight later on in my contribution but I think I should be enabled to

:42:33. > :42:40.make an important part of this -- give weight. This is why the logic

:42:41. > :42:44.of an extended air campaign is in fact mission creep and western boots

:42:45. > :42:48.on the ground, whatever he may say now about keeping British combat

:42:49. > :42:55.troops out of the way, are a real possibility. Thirdly, the military

:42:56. > :43:00.aim of attacking Isil targets in Syria is not really part of a

:43:01. > :43:06.coherent diplomatic strategy. The UN Security Council resolution to 249

:43:07. > :43:11.passed after the Paris atrocities and cited in today's motion does not

:43:12. > :43:16.give clear and unambiguous authorisation for UK bombing in

:43:17. > :43:21.Syria. To do so it would have had to be passed under chapter seven of the

:43:22. > :43:29.United Nations Charter to which the Security Council could not agree.

:43:30. > :43:37.The UN resolution is certainly a welcome framework. For joint action

:43:38. > :43:44.to cut off funding, oil revenues, arms supplies from Isil. But I

:43:45. > :43:50.wonder how many side there are of that happening. I thank him for

:43:51. > :43:55.giving way. We don't agree on much but on the necessity to cut off the

:43:56. > :44:01.oil supplies I do agree with him but I am at a loss to understand why he

:44:02. > :44:04.would oppose a strike which are such a crucial part in targeting oil

:44:05. > :44:12.supplies which are providing funding for Isil Daesh. The problem is, the

:44:13. > :44:17.oil supplies that are being sold are going into other countries come into

:44:18. > :44:27.Turkey and other places and I think we need to know exactly who is

:44:28. > :44:31.buying that oil, who is funding it, what banks are involved in financial

:44:32. > :44:37.transactions which ultimately end up with Isil and which other countries

:44:38. > :44:46.in the region may or may not be involved. That is despite the clear

:44:47. > :44:51.risk of a potentially disastrous incidents, the shooting down of

:44:52. > :44:54.eight Russian military aircraft by Turkish forces is a sign of the

:44:55. > :45:01.danger of a serious escalation of this whole issue.

:45:02. > :45:07.I'm grateful to him for giving way. The number of the grand troops is

:45:08. > :45:12.unknown and the composition also but we note by definition they are

:45:13. > :45:16.opposition fighters, anti-Assad. Does he agree the Prime Minister

:45:17. > :45:19.still has a question to answer about how we can work with them to take

:45:20. > :45:23.round from Daesh without getting drawn into a wider conflict with

:45:24. > :45:28.Russia, given they are on the other side? I think the member for

:45:29. > :45:34.Brighton makes an important point. She has been very active in trying

:45:35. > :45:38.to promote peace and humanitarian resolutions to the many conflicts

:45:39. > :45:41.that exist around the world. Fourthly, Mr Speaker, the Prime

:45:42. > :45:47.Minister has avoided spelling out to the British people the warnings he

:45:48. > :45:51.has surely been given. The likely impact of UK air strikes on the

:45:52. > :45:59.threat of terrorist attacks in the UK. That's something everyone who

:46:00. > :46:02.backs the Government's motion should think about very carefully before we

:46:03. > :46:08.decide whether or not to send RAF pilots into action over Syria. It is

:46:09. > :46:14.critically important, Mr Speaker, that we as a House are honest with

:46:15. > :46:16.the British people about the potential consequences of the action

:46:17. > :46:22.the Prime Minister is proposing to us today. I'm aware that there are

:46:23. > :46:26.those with military experience, including members on the benches

:46:27. > :46:33.opposite as well is on this side, who have argued that by extending UK

:46:34. > :46:38.bombing will," increase the short-term risk of terrorist attacks

:46:39. > :46:43.in Britain." We should also remember the impact, Mr Speaker, on

:46:44. > :46:51.communities here in Britain. Sadly, since the Paris tax there has been a

:46:52. > :46:55.sharp increase in Islamophobic incidence and physical attacks --

:46:56. > :46:59.attacks. Have discussed these with people in my local mosque in my

:47:00. > :47:03.constituency and it is horrific. Surely, Mr speaker, the message from

:47:04. > :47:10.all of us in this house today must go out, none of us, let's say this

:47:11. > :47:13.together, we will not tolerate any form of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia

:47:14. > :47:20.or racism in any form in this country. The Prime Minister has not

:47:21. > :47:26.offered a serious assessment in my view of the intensified air campaign

:47:27. > :47:34.on civilian casualties in Isil held Syrian territory, or the wider

:47:35. > :47:40.Syrian refugee crisis. At least 250,000 have already been killed in

:47:41. > :47:46.Syria's terrible civil war. 11 million made homeless. And 4 million

:47:47. > :47:50.forced to leave the country. Many more have been killed by the Assad

:47:51. > :47:58.regime banned by Isil itself will stop yet more bombing in Syria will

:47:59. > :48:08.kill De -- innocent civilians, no doubt about that command many more

:48:09. > :48:11.civilians into refugees. Yesterday I was sent a message from a

:48:12. > :48:19.constituent of mine who comes from Syria. I'm sorry, it's not funny,

:48:20. > :48:26.it's a family who are suffering. I quote from his message: I'm a Syrian

:48:27. > :48:31.from a city which is now controlled by Isil. Members of my family still

:48:32. > :48:37.live there and Isil didn't kill them. My question to David Cameron

:48:38. > :48:43.is, can you guarantee the safety of my family when you're a forces drop

:48:44. > :48:51.bombs on my city? It's a fair question from a family who are very

:48:52. > :48:55.concerned. Thank you very much. I would say to the right honourable

:48:56. > :49:01.gentleman, I speak as a member of the military who has left and there

:49:02. > :49:05.is a fundamental point here that the lead -- Leader of the Opposition is

:49:06. > :49:09.making. This is about national security. All of the conflict in

:49:10. > :49:13.ordinance, the complex situations, it's very, very difficult but it

:49:14. > :49:16.comes down to national security and inhibiting what these people are

:49:17. > :49:23.trying to do on the streets of this country. Yes, of course, security on

:49:24. > :49:27.the streets of this country in all of our communities is very

:49:28. > :49:34.important. That's why we have supported the government in no

:49:35. > :49:35.longer pursuing the strategy of cutting the police and also

:49:36. > :49:41.increasing security in this country. Kos, clearly none of us

:49:42. > :49:49.want any kind of atrocity on the streets of this country. My borough

:49:50. > :49:54.was deeply affected by 7/7 in 2005. Can I just say, the member who has

:49:55. > :49:58.the floor cannot be expected to give way to a further intervention when

:49:59. > :50:02.he's in the process of answering an existing one. The honourable

:50:03. > :50:06.gentleman is an experienced enough denizen of this house to be aware of

:50:07. > :50:17.that. I'd like to give weight to the member for Tottenham. David Lammy.

:50:18. > :50:24.Stop it! I'm very grateful to the leader of

:50:25. > :50:31.the opposition. In making his points, does the leader of the

:50:32. > :50:37.opposition access that these 70,000 moderate Sunnis that the Prime

:50:38. > :50:44.Minister claims are there, consists of many different Jihadist groups,

:50:45. > :50:50.and there is some concern, I think across the House, that in

:50:51. > :50:53.potentially degrading Isil, Daesh, which is possible, we actually

:50:54. > :50:58.create a vacuum into which other jihadists come over time? That

:50:59. > :51:05.surely does not make the streets of Britain safer. Mr Speaker, in the

:51:06. > :51:10.sense of north London geography I now give way to the member for

:51:11. > :51:15.Southgate. I'm very grateful for him for giving way. He has a consistent

:51:16. > :51:21.position in relation to opposing air strikes, consistently in this House.

:51:22. > :51:25.In 2014 on the 27th of September when you voted against air strikes

:51:26. > :51:27.in Iraq, he said, I do not believe that further air strikes and the

:51:28. > :51:31.deepening of our involvement will solve the problem. Does he maintain

:51:32. > :51:38.his opposition to air strikes in Iraq, let alone extending it to

:51:39. > :51:42.Syria? I would thank both members for their interventions. The point

:51:43. > :51:45.made by my honourable friend, the member for Tottenham, is a serious

:51:46. > :51:49.one. We have to be careful about what happens in the future. As the

:51:50. > :51:53.Prime Minister and others have said we have to be very aware of the

:51:54. > :51:58.danger of some people, mainly young people, being deeply radicalised and

:51:59. > :52:03.end up doing very dangerous things indeed. Is the radicalisation of

:52:04. > :52:05.some, a very small number but nevertheless a significant number,

:52:06. > :52:10.of young people across Europe a product of the war or something

:52:11. > :52:14.else? I think we need to think very deeply about that and think very

:52:15. > :52:20.deeply about what has happened in this world since 2001, and the

:52:21. > :52:25.increasing numbers of people that are suffering because of it. I rest

:52:26. > :52:38.my case at that point. There isn't, Mr Speaker, an EU wide strategy to

:52:39. > :52:42.provide humanitarian assistance to those victims. Mr Speaker, perhaps

:52:43. > :52:48.most importantly of all, I asked the Prime Minister this, is he able to

:52:49. > :52:54.explain how British bombing in Syria will contribute to a comprehensive

:52:55. > :53:02.negotiated political settlement of the Syrian war? Such a settlement is

:53:03. > :53:08.widely accepted to be the only way to ensure the isolation and defeat

:53:09. > :53:13.of Isil. Isil grew out of the invasion of Iraq and it has

:53:14. > :53:20.flourished in Syria in the chaos and horror of a multi-fronted Civil War.

:53:21. > :53:24.I thank my Right Honourable friend for giving way. The Prime Minister

:53:25. > :53:28.spoke often of the choice between action and inaction that we face

:53:29. > :53:34.today. But those of us who will be voting against air strikes, we also

:53:35. > :53:39.want to see action. The Prime Minister said almost nothing about

:53:40. > :53:45.cutting off the financial supplies for Daesh, which buy the bombs,

:53:46. > :53:49.which helped radicalised recruits. Does my Right Honourable friend

:53:50. > :53:55.agree with me that we need action on this point? We absolutely need

:53:56. > :53:59.action to ensure there is a diplomatic and political solution to

:54:00. > :54:02.the crisis. I welcome what the Prime Minister said about speeding up the

:54:03. > :54:08.process in Vienna. Surely the message ought to be let's speed that

:54:09. > :54:15.up rather than sending the bombers in now to bring about political

:54:16. > :54:19.settlement. What we need, therefore, Mr Speaker, is an

:54:20. > :54:26.involvement of all the main regional and international powers. I know

:54:27. > :54:33.that has been attempted. I know that they have been discussions in Vienna

:54:34. > :54:36.and we welcome that. I think it is regrettable... Mr Speaker I will try

:54:37. > :54:42.and make progress with the speech, if I may. There are over 150 members

:54:43. > :54:47.who wish to speak, therefore I think long speeches on the front benches

:54:48. > :54:51.take time out of backbench speeches. The aim must be to establish a

:54:52. > :54:55.broad-based and in Syria that has the support of the majority of its

:54:56. > :55:05.people. Difficult as that is to envisage at the present time. Are

:55:06. > :55:08.you going to give way? No. Such a settlement could take away territory

:55:09. > :55:13.from Isil and bring about their defeat in Syria. Ultimately, Mr

:55:14. > :55:17.Speaker, I'm sorry to have to tell members opposite. I've given away

:55:18. > :55:26.quite a lot to members on both sides and I will continue with my speech.

:55:27. > :55:33.Sit down! Order! The very long established

:55:34. > :55:38.convention of this House is the member who has the floor gives way

:55:39. > :55:42.or not as he or she chooses. The leader of the opposition has made it

:55:43. > :55:45.clear for now he's not going to if way, the appropriate response is not

:55:46. > :55:54.for a member to jump up and shout "give weight! " Jeremy Corbyn. Thank

:55:55. > :56:01.you -- give way. The solution for Syria has to be for all of the

:56:02. > :56:06.people of Syria, I think we are agreed on that. I thought I made it

:56:07. > :56:10.clear, I think the Speaker made it clear, that at the moment I'm not

:56:11. > :56:15.giving way. I'm really sorry but I'm not, OK? The Government's

:56:16. > :56:29.proposals... The Government's proposals for... On a point of

:56:30. > :56:33.order, though it is indeed customary that he who holds the floor decides

:56:34. > :56:37.whether or not to give way, is it not also customary to answer

:56:38. > :56:49.questions when they are put in interventions and we are waiting for

:56:50. > :56:52.the answer on Iraq? Answer! Answer! The honourable gentleman is a Savic

:56:53. > :56:57.and the experienced parliamentarian to know he has made his own point in

:56:58. > :57:04.his own way and that it's on the record. Mr Jeremy Corbyn. Answer!

:57:05. > :57:08.Answer! Thank you, Mr Speaker. If I could move on with the speech I

:57:09. > :57:13.would be most grateful, Mr Speaker. The Government's proposals... The

:57:14. > :57:21.Government's proposals for military action in Syria are not backed by a

:57:22. > :57:25.clear and unauthorised... Fear and unambiguous authorisation by the

:57:26. > :57:28.United Nations. It does not meet the seven tests set down by our own

:57:29. > :57:34.Foreign Affairs Committee. And it does not fulfil three of the four

:57:35. > :57:41.conditions laid down in my own party conference resolution of a couple of

:57:42. > :57:44.months ago. In the past week, Mr Speaker, voice has been given to

:57:45. > :57:48.growing opposition to the Government's bombing plans across

:57:49. > :57:53.the country. In Parliament, outside, in the media and indeed in

:57:54. > :57:58.my own party. And I believe it's a consideration of all the wars that

:57:59. > :58:03.we have been involved in in the last 14 years. These matters were debated

:58:04. > :58:07.a great deal during my own campaign to be elected the leader of the

:58:08. > :58:16.Labour Party. Many people think very deeply about these matters. The

:58:17. > :58:20.likes of the record of Western military intervention must be

:58:21. > :58:24.analysed. British bombing in Syria risks more of what President Obama

:58:25. > :58:29.in a very thoughtful moment called "the unintended consequences of the

:58:30. > :58:36.war in Iraq" which he himself opposed at the time. The spectre, Mr

:58:37. > :58:42.Speaker, of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya looms over this debate. Mr

:58:43. > :58:51.Speaker, I'm not giving way, I'm going to carry on with my speech. Mr

:58:52. > :58:55.Speaker, to oppose another war and intervention, in my view, is

:58:56. > :58:59.actually not pacifism, it's hard-headed common-sense which I

:59:00. > :59:05.think we should be thinking about today in this House. To resist

:59:06. > :59:08.Isil's determination to draw the Western powers back into the heart

:59:09. > :59:15.of the Middle East isn't to turn our back on our allies, it is refusing

:59:16. > :59:21.to play into the hands of Isil and what I suspect some of them want us

:59:22. > :59:26.to do. Is it wrong for us in Westminster to see a problem, pass a

:59:27. > :59:31.motion, drop bombs and pretending we are doing something to solve it?

:59:32. > :59:40.That's what we did in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya. I ask the House this

:59:41. > :59:47.question: Has terrorism increased or decreased as a result of all of

:59:48. > :59:51.that? STUDIO: As the leader of the

:59:52. > :59:54.opposition comes to the end of his speech we have to leave it. We've

:59:55. > :59:58.run out of time and been on the air for two hours. We've seen opening

:59:59. > :00:03.speeches from the government and opposition. Both Mr Cameron and Mr

:00:04. > :00:07.Corbyn having a pretty rough time of it. I think both sides will regard

:00:08. > :00:10.the leaders perhaps getting the debate off to the kind of start they

:00:11. > :00:16.would have hoped are both struggling with interventions, difficult

:00:17. > :00:20.debate. We will see how it continues. The debate will continue

:00:21. > :00:24.on BBC Parliament and BBC News will be across this for the rest of the

:00:25. > :00:29.day up until the vote is taken around 10pm tonight. But from this

:00:30. > :00:34.Daily Politics Special it's over, we will be back tomorrow with the Daily

:00:35. > :00:37.Politics when we will be able to review everything that has happened

:00:38. > :00:40.today. But for now, thanks for joining us here and it's goodbye

:00:41. > :00:41.from the Daily Politics.