Live Syria Statement

:00:00. > :00:07.review focusing on The Executive layer in FTSE 350 bodies.

:00:08. > :00:16.Statement, the Prime Minister. I said I would respond personally to

:00:17. > :00:19.the foreign affairs select committee report on extending British military

:00:20. > :00:23.today, and copies of my response today, and copies of my response

:00:24. > :00:27.have been made available to every member of the House. The committee

:00:28. > :00:32.produced a comprehensive report, which asked a series of important

:00:33. > :00:35.listen carefully to the questions listen carefully to the questions

:00:36. > :00:40.and views expressed by members on all sides of the House. I want to

:00:41. > :00:44.questions today. There are different questions today. There are different

:00:45. > :00:53.ways of putting them, but they boil down to this. Why, why ask, why now,

:00:54. > :00:58.is what we are contemplating legal, where are the ground troops to help

:00:59. > :01:01.us meet our objectives, what is the strategy that brings together

:01:02. > :01:05.everything we are doing, particularly in Syria, is there an

:01:06. > :01:09.end to this conflict and is there a plan for what follows? Let me deal

:01:10. > :01:16.with each of these questions as directly as I can. Asked, why? The

:01:17. > :01:30.reason for at Saint is the direct threat that Isil poses jerk country.

:01:31. > :01:33.They have attacked... They have already taken the lives of British

:01:34. > :01:47.hostages and Crucially they have repeatedly tried

:01:48. > :01:49.to attack us in Britain. In the last 12 months of police and security

:01:50. > :01:54.services have disrupted no fewer than seven terrorist plots to attack

:01:55. > :01:59.the UK. Every one of which was either linked to Isil or inspired by

:02:00. > :02:04.their propaganda. I am in no doubt that it is in our national interest

:02:05. > :02:14.to take action to stop them, which means taking action in Syria because

:02:15. > :02:19.of Raqqa. But why us? Our first job of Raqqa. But why us? Our first job

:02:20. > :02:24.is to keep the British people say. is to keep the British people say.

:02:25. > :02:27.We have the assets to do it and we can significantly extend the

:02:28. > :02:34.capabilities of the international Coalition forces. That is one reason

:02:35. > :02:36.why members of the international Coalition, including President Obama

:02:37. > :02:41.and President Hollande, have made it clear they want Britain to stand

:02:42. > :02:46.with them in joining air strikes in Syria and Iraq. These are our

:02:47. > :02:53.closest allies, and they want our help. Partly this is about our

:02:54. > :02:57.capabilities. As we are showing in Iraq, the IDF can carry out what is

:02:58. > :02:59.called dynamic targeting, where called dynamic targeting, where

:03:00. > :03:08.pilots can strike the most difficult targets a rapid pace with

:03:09. > :03:11.extraordinary precision, and provide support to forces on the ground. We

:03:12. > :03:18.have the brimstone system, which allows as to strike accurately with

:03:19. > :03:25.little collateral damage, something the Americans do not have. Tornado

:03:26. > :03:29.aircraft has no rival, 67% of the Coalition's tactical reconnaissance

:03:30. > :03:34.in Iraq, while also equipped for strikes. In addition, the drawings

:03:35. > :03:40.provide 70% of intelligence in Syria, but are not currently able to

:03:41. > :03:46.use the high precision missile systems. We also have the abilities

:03:47. > :03:51.to sustain our operations per month into the future. Of course we have

:03:52. > :03:56.important answer to the question why important answer to the question why

:03:57. > :03:59.us is even more fundamental, and it us is even more fundamental, and

:04:00. > :04:04.is this. We should not be content is this. We should not be content

:04:05. > :04:08.outsourcing our security to our allies. If we believe action can

:04:09. > :04:12.protect us, or then we should be part of that action with our

:04:13. > :04:17.allies, not standing aside from it. And from this moral point comes a

:04:18. > :04:23.fundamental question, if we will not act now, when France has been struck

:04:24. > :04:29.world can be forgiven for asking if world can be forgiven for asking if

:04:30. > :04:36.not now, when? That leads to the next question, why now? The first

:04:37. > :04:37.answer is because of the grave danger that Isil poses to our

:04:38. > :04:45.security, a danger that has security, a danger that has

:04:46. > :04:47.intensified in recent weeks. But there are additional reasons why

:04:48. > :04:54.action now is porting. Look at what has changed. Not just the attack in

:04:55. > :04:57.Paris, but the world has come together and a UN Security Council

:04:58. > :05:00.Resolution. And there is a real political process under way. This

:05:01. > :05:05.could lead to a new government in Syria, with whom we can work to

:05:06. > :05:08.defeat Isil for good. Up as I explained yesterday, we cannot wait

:05:09. > :05:12.for that to be complete before we begin acting to degrade Isil and

:05:13. > :05:18.reduce their capability to attack us. So let us be clear about the

:05:19. > :05:22.military objectives we are pursuing. Yes, we want to defeat the

:05:23. > :05:28.terrorists by dismantling their networks, stopping their funding,

:05:29. > :05:34.and taking out those plotting terrorist attack against the UK, but

:05:35. > :05:38.there is a broader objective. For as long as Isil can peddle the myth of

:05:39. > :05:48.a so-called caliphate in Iraq and Syria, it will be are rallying call

:05:49. > :05:59.around the world. That makes us less safe. Just as we have reduced the

:06:00. > :06:01.size of it in Iraq, in pushing it out of Iraq we have to do the same

:06:02. > :06:07.in Syria. Another reason for action now is that the success in Iraq for

:06:08. > :06:15.squeezing the so-called caliphate is put at risk with failure to act in

:06:16. > :06:24.Syria. The border is not recognised by Isil, and we seriously hamper our

:06:25. > :06:30.reached the Syrian border. So when reached the Syrian border. So when

:06:31. > :06:31.have to ask ourselves whether the have to ask ourselves whether the

:06:32. > :06:31.risks of in action are greater than risks of in action are greater than

:06:32. > :06:34.the risks of taking action. Everyday the risks of taking action. Everyday

:06:35. > :06:35.can grow stronger and more plots can can grow stronger and more plots can

:06:36. > :06:37.be undertaken. That is why all the advice I have received, the military

:06:38. > :06:43.advice, the diplomatic advice and the security advice all says yes,

:06:44. > :06:48.that the risks of inaction are greater. Some have asked

:06:49. > :06:54.specifically whether taking action would make the UK more of a target

:06:55. > :06:57.for attacks. Let me tell the House, the judgment of the director-general

:06:58. > :07:01.of the Security service and the chairman of the joint intelligence

:07:02. > :07:07.committee is that the UK is already in the top tier of countries that

:07:08. > :07:10.Isil is targeting. I am clear the only way to deal with that is to

:07:11. > :07:18.address the threat we face and to do so now. Let me turn to the question

:07:19. > :07:21.of legality. It is a long-standing constitutional convention that we do

:07:22. > :07:26.but the document I published today but the document I published today

:07:27. > :07:31.shows in some detail the clear legal basis for military action against

:07:32. > :07:34.right of self defence is recognised right of self defence is recognised

:07:35. > :07:40.in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The right of self defence

:07:41. > :07:45.maybe exercised individually, with it is necessary to the UK's on

:07:46. > :07:49.defence, and collectively in the defence of our friends and allies.

:07:50. > :07:53.The main basis of the global Coalition's actions against Isil in

:07:54. > :07:58.Syria is the collective self defence of Iraq. Iraq has legitimate

:07:59. > :08:02.government, won the support and help. It is a solid basis of

:08:03. > :08:07.evidence on which to conclude that there is a direct link between the

:08:08. > :08:15.presence and activities of Isil in Syria and the ongoing attack in

:08:16. > :08:18.Iraq. Secondly, that the Assad regime are able to take action

:08:19. > :08:25.attack on Iraq, or attacks on as. It attack on Iraq, or attacks on as. It

:08:26. > :08:30.is also clear that the campaign against the UK and the allies have

:08:31. > :08:33.reached the level of an armed attack, such that force may be

:08:34. > :08:39.lawfully used in self defence to prevent further atrocities being

:08:40. > :08:41.committed by Isil. This is further underscored by unanimous adoption of

:08:42. > :08:51.UN Security Council Resolution two to 49. We should be clear about what

:08:52. > :08:54.it means and what it says. -- 2249. The whole world came together

:08:55. > :08:57.Security Council to agree this Security Council to agree

:08:58. > :08:59.resolution unanimously. The resolution unanimously. The

:09:00. > :09:03.resolution states that Isil constitutes a global and

:09:04. > :09:08.unprecedented threat to international peace and security. It

:09:09. > :09:12.calls for member states to take, I quote, all necessary measures to

:09:13. > :09:19.prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by Isil. And

:09:20. > :09:23.crucially, it says we should, quote, eradicate the safe haven they

:09:24. > :09:26.have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria. Turning to

:09:27. > :09:34.will assist us, in Iraq the answer will assist us, in Iraq the answer

:09:35. > :09:41.is clear. We have the Iraqi security forces and the Kurdish Peshmerga. In

:09:42. > :09:43.Syria it is more complex. The report I am publishing today shows we

:09:44. > :09:48.believe there are around 70,000 believe there are around 70,000

:09:49. > :09:50.Syrian opposition fighters, principally the Free Syrian Army,

:09:51. > :09:55.who do not belong to extremist groups, and we can co-ordinated

:09:56. > :09:59.attacks on Isil with them. In addition there are the Kurdish armed

:10:00. > :10:01.groups who have also shown themselves capable of taking

:10:02. > :10:05.territory, holding territory and administering it. Crucially,

:10:06. > :10:21.relieving the suffering that the civilian population in durable under

:10:22. > :10:27.Isil control. -- endured. Moderate armed SUNY Arabs have proved capable

:10:28. > :10:33.of taking territory north of Aleppo, and they have swept into Idlib

:10:34. > :10:36.province. In the south of Syria, the southern front of the Free Syrian

:10:37. > :10:41.Army has consolidated its control over significant areas and worked to

:10:42. > :10:48.prevent terrorists from operating. These people are ground troops, they

:10:49. > :10:56.need our help. When they get it they succeed. So in my view we should do

:10:57. > :10:59.more to help them from the. Those who ask questions about ground

:11:00. > :11:02.troops are right to do so. The full answer cannot be achieved until

:11:03. > :11:10.there is a new Syrian Government that represents all of the Syrian

:11:11. > :11:15.people. It is this new government who will be the natural partners for

:11:16. > :11:21.our forces in defeating Isil for good. We cannot defeat Isil simply

:11:22. > :11:27.from the air, or purely with military action alone. It requires a

:11:28. > :11:30.full political settlement. But the question is, can we wait for that

:11:31. > :11:37.settlement before taking action? Again, my answer is no we cannot.

:11:38. > :11:41.Regarding whether this is part of an overall strategy, the answer is yes.

:11:42. > :11:51.Our approach has four pillars. First, our counter strategy means we

:11:52. > :11:55.can address the poisonous extremist ideology that is the root cause for

:11:56. > :11:56.the threat we face. Second our support for the diplomatic and

:11:57. > :12:00.political process. We should be political process. We should be

:12:01. > :12:07.clear about the process. Many across the House rightly said how vital it

:12:08. > :12:11.is to have all of the key regional players around the table, including

:12:12. > :12:17.Iran and Russia. We're now seeing Iran and Saudi Arabia sitting around

:12:18. > :12:22.the same table with America and Russia, as well as France, Turkey

:12:23. > :12:23.and Britain. All of us working towards the transition to a new

:12:24. > :12:28.government in Syria. The third government in Syria. The third

:12:29. > :12:33.pillar is the military action I am describing to degrade Isil and

:12:34. > :12:38.reduce the threat they pose. It is working in Iraq, and I believe it

:12:39. > :12:46.can work in Syria. The fourth pillar is an long-term stabilisation. House

:12:47. > :12:53.has heard many times that Britain has given over ?1.1 billion, by far

:12:54. > :12:55.the largest commitment of any European country, second to the

:12:56. > :12:59.United States. This is helping to reduce the need for Syrians to

:13:00. > :13:07.attempt the perilous journey to attempt the perilous journey to

:13:08. > :13:13.Europe. The donor confidence I am hosting in February with Germany,

:13:14. > :13:13.Kuwait, and the... But the House is asking more questions about whether

:13:14. > :13:18.there will be post-conflict there will be post-conflict

:13:19. > :13:22.reconstruction efforts to support a new Syrian Government when it

:13:23. > :13:29.emerges. Britain's answer to that question is absolutely yes. Britain

:13:30. > :13:36.least another billion pounds for least another billion pounds for

:13:37. > :13:38.this task. All of these elements, counterterrorism, political and

:13:39. > :13:41.diplomatic, military and Germanic diplomatic, military and Germanic

:13:42. > :13:46.TV, they need to happen together to achieve a long-term solution in

:13:47. > :14:00.project long-term process. -- project long-term process. --

:14:01. > :14:09.end goal? The initial objective is end goal? The initial objective is

:14:10. > :14:17.to reduce Isil's opacity to do us harm. I believe this can lead to its

:14:18. > :14:20.eradication. -- capacity. No one predict the rise of Isil, they are

:14:21. > :14:25.not what the people of Iraq and Syria want. You do not represent the

:14:26. > :14:31.losing ground in Iraq following losing ground in Iraq following

:14:32. > :14:37.losses in two cities. We're not naive to the complexity of the task.

:14:38. > :14:39.It will require patience and persistence, and our work will not

:14:40. > :14:43.be complete until we have reached our end goal, which is having

:14:44. > :14:50.government in Iraq and Syria which can command the confidence of all

:14:51. > :14:55.people. In Syria that means a government without President Assad.

:14:56. > :14:59.a terrorist, but only good a terrorist, but only good

:15:00. > :15:04.governance can kill terrorism. This applies clearly to both countries.

:15:05. > :15:10.People also want to know we have learnt the lessons of previous

:15:11. > :15:13.conflict 's. Whatever then one thought of the Iraq war, terrible

:15:14. > :15:13.mistakes were made in the aftermath in dismantling the state-owned

:15:14. > :15:26.institutions of the country. The political process in Syria will

:15:27. > :15:32.in time deliver new leadership, that is the transition we should support.

:15:33. > :15:36.We are not in the business of dismantling Syria's state and

:15:37. > :15:41.institutions. In Libya, the state and institutions have been hollowed

:15:42. > :15:48.out by 40 years of dictatorship. The difference between Libya and Syria,

:15:49. > :15:52.is that in Syria, we have firm international commitment from all

:15:53. > :15:58.the backers of the future Syrian government around the table for

:15:59. > :16:03.talks. The commitment is clear, to preserve and develop the state in

:16:04. > :16:07.Syria and allow a new government to govern for all its people. I have

:16:08. > :16:14.attempted to answer the main questions, why, why now, why ours,

:16:15. > :16:22.is it legal? What is the end point? And what is the plan for a

:16:23. > :16:27.reconstruction? I know this is a highly complex situation and I know

:16:28. > :16:31.members will have questions. One will be about the confused and

:16:32. > :16:40.confusing situation in Syria with regard to Russia's intervention. Let

:16:41. > :16:48.me reassure you that the American led strategy has an arrangement with

:16:49. > :16:51.Russia to insure the safety of all coalition forces, which would

:16:52. > :16:58.include our brave RAF islands. Another question would be if we're

:16:59. > :17:08.taking sides in the conflict between different factions. Our vision for

:17:09. > :17:14.the future of Syria, as with Iraq, is not a sick teen entity, but one

:17:15. > :17:22.government in the interests of all those people. People. We will

:17:23. > :17:29.heartily welcome support for international action against Isil

:17:30. > :17:34.and towards a diplomatic future in Syria. The document sets out

:17:35. > :17:39.intercepting smugglers, ceiling borders and enforcing sanctions to

:17:40. > :17:43.stop people trading with Isil. But ultimately, Isil is able to generate

:17:44. > :17:47.income through its control of territory, so while we're working

:17:48. > :17:52.with international partners to squeeze their finances where we can,

:17:53. > :17:54.it's the rolling back of Isil's territory which will ultimately cut

:17:55. > :17:58.off its finances. Two of the most off its finances. Two of the most

:17:59. > :18:05.complex questions are these, will acting against temp one in Syria

:18:06. > :18:10.actually help bring about transition? I believe the answer is

:18:11. > :18:12.yes, not least because it can't be genuine transition without

:18:13. > :18:19.maintaining the territorial integrity of Syria, and Isil deny

:18:20. > :18:23.this with their current action. Destroying Isil helps the moderate

:18:24. > :18:33.forces and these moderate forces will be crucial in the Syria's

:18:34. > :18:38.future. The expert advice I had could not be more clear, we will not

:18:39. > :18:44.be Isil if we waver in our view that ultimately Assad must go. We cannot

:18:45. > :18:47.win all the majority opinion, which is vital for the long-term stability

:18:48. > :18:55.of Syria if we were to suddenly change position. In the end, it

:18:56. > :18:59.comes back to this question, should we take action? All those who say

:19:00. > :19:03.that ultimately we need a diplomatic solution and the transition to a new

:19:04. > :19:08.government in Syria, they are right. Working with the new representative

:19:09. > :19:13.government is the way to eradicate Isil in Syria in the long-term. But

:19:14. > :19:19.family wait for that happened before we take military action? I say we

:19:20. > :19:23.can't. Let me be clear. There will not be a vote in this house unless

:19:24. > :19:29.that is a clear majority for action, because we will not hand the

:19:30. > :19:33.publicity to Isil. I also clear that any motion we bring before this

:19:34. > :19:38.house would explicitly recognise that military action is not the

:19:39. > :19:44.whole answer. Proud as I am a very incredible service men and women, I

:19:45. > :19:47.will not pretend or overstate the significance of our potential

:19:48. > :19:50.contribution. I will not understate the complexity of this issue, nor

:19:51. > :19:59.the risks involved in any military action. But we do face a fundamental

:20:00. > :20:03.threat to our security. We can't wait for political transition, we

:20:04. > :20:07.have to hit these terrorists in heartlands right now, and we must

:20:08. > :20:13.not shirk responsibility for security or hand it to others.

:20:14. > :20:18.Throughout our history, the United Kingdom has stood up to defend our

:20:19. > :20:28.values and our way of life. We can and we must do so again. And I

:20:29. > :20:32.commend this statement to the house. I would like to thank the Prime

:20:33. > :20:37.Minister for providing an advance copy of his statement, which I got

:20:38. > :20:42.earlier today. After the despicable and horrific attacks in Paris a

:20:43. > :20:47.fortnight ago, our first priority has to be the security of people in

:20:48. > :20:53.this country in the future. So when we consider the case for military

:20:54. > :20:57.action, the issue of whether what he proposes strengthens or undermines

:20:58. > :21:03.our security must be front and centre stage of our minds. There is

:21:04. > :21:08.no doubt that Isil has imposed a reign of terror on millions, in

:21:09. > :21:12.Iraq, in Syria and now in Libya. All that Isil stands for is contrary to

:21:13. > :21:17.everything that those of us on these benches have struggled for over many

:21:18. > :21:22.generations. There is no doubt it poses a threat to our people. The

:21:23. > :21:27.question must now be whether extending UK bombings from Iraq to

:21:28. > :21:32.Syria is likely to reduce or increase that threat and whether it

:21:33. > :21:36.will counter the terrorist threat in the Middle East. With that in mind,

:21:37. > :21:40.I would like to put seven questions to the Prime Minister. First, does

:21:41. > :21:45.the Prime Minister believed that extending air strikes to attempt to,

:21:46. > :21:49.which is already being bombed by other powers, will make a

:21:50. > :21:55.significant military impact on the ground, which has so far seen Isil

:21:56. > :21:59.game as well as lose territory? Does he expect it will be a war winning

:22:00. > :22:06.strategy or does he think that other members of the coalition, including

:22:07. > :22:10.the Gulf states, Canada and Australia, have halted their

:22:11. > :22:14.participation? Second, is the Prime Minister's view that the air

:22:15. > :22:19.campaign against Isil can be successful without ground forces? If

:22:20. > :22:29.not, does he believe that the Kurdish forces or at the back for

:22:30. > :22:33.the Syrian army would be able to take back Isil territory if the air

:22:34. > :22:40.campaign were successful? Is it not more likely that other more radical

:22:41. > :22:45.forces would take over? Third, without credible or acceptable

:22:46. > :22:54.ground forces, isn't the logic of intensified air strike campaign, can

:22:55. > :22:59.he today will out the deployment of British ground forces to Syria?

:23:00. > :23:03.Fourth, does the Prime Minister believed that the United Nations

:23:04. > :23:11.security resolution gives clear and unambiguous authorisation for UK air

:23:12. > :23:15.strikes? And what coordinated action with other United Nations member

:23:16. > :23:21.states has there been, under the terms of the resolution, to cut off

:23:22. > :23:27.funding, oil revenues and arms supplies from Isil into the

:23:28. > :23:32.territory it currently holds? And in the absence of any coordinated UN

:23:33. > :23:37.military or diplomatic strategy, does he believe that more military

:23:38. > :23:42.forces over Syria could increase the risk of dangerous incidents, such as

:23:43. > :23:47.the shooting down of a Russian aircraft by Turkish forces this

:23:48. > :23:52.week. Fifth, how does the prime ministers think that an extension of

:23:53. > :23:57.UK bombing would contribute to a negotiated political settlement in

:23:58. > :24:03.Syria, which is widely believed to be the only solution to defeating

:24:04. > :24:07.Isil. The conference last weekend was a good step forward, but it has

:24:08. > :24:13.some way to go. Sixth, what assessment has he been given by

:24:14. > :24:17.their likely impact of British air strikes in Syria of the threat in

:24:18. > :24:20.terrorist attacks in Britain? And what impact does he believe in

:24:21. > :24:29.intensified air campaign will have on civilian casualties in the Isil

:24:30. > :24:35.-held territory and the wider Syrian refugee crisis, which is so enormous

:24:36. > :24:41.and so appalling. Finally, in the light of the record of Western

:24:42. > :24:46.military intervention in recent years, does the Prime Minister

:24:47. > :24:52.accept that UK bombing of Syria could risk more of what President

:24:53. > :24:59.Obama called unintended consequences? And that the lasting

:25:00. > :25:10.defeat of Isil can only be secured by Syrian forces within the region?

:25:11. > :25:15.Let me say that I very much respect his long-held views about these

:25:16. > :25:19.issues and is quite correct caution before committing to any of these

:25:20. > :25:26.actions, but I do believe there is a good answer to the seven absolutely

:25:27. > :25:33.just it questions he asks. -- absolutely legitimate questions. I

:25:34. > :25:37.tried to get in my flavour of the specific things we things we think

:25:38. > :25:42.we would be able to do. It is worth listening to our closest allies, the

:25:43. > :25:47.Americans and French, who want us to take part, not just for the cover it

:25:48. > :25:50.provides, but because of the capabilities we bring. It is worth

:25:51. > :25:55.listening closely to what they say, so my answer to the first question

:25:56. > :25:58.is we would make a difference. Second, he is right to raise the

:25:59. > :26:04.issue of ground forces and I tried to tackle it in my statement. I

:26:05. > :26:15.would guide you that there are many who want to play down the existence

:26:16. > :26:22.and rule of the Free Syrian Army. Our intelligence says there are many

:26:23. > :26:27.moderate forces able to help. We can see that. He asked about boots on

:26:28. > :26:31.the ground, we are not deploying British combat forces and we're not

:26:32. > :26:36.going to. We think actually the presence of western boots on the

:26:37. > :26:41.ground in that way would be counter-productive. That is one of

:26:42. > :26:44.the things we have all learned from previous conflicts and we don't want

:26:45. > :26:49.to make that mistake again. The fourth question is whether the UN

:26:50. > :26:58.resolution is ambiguous. I believe it is, he rightly asks what else is

:26:59. > :27:04.the UN doing on sanctions and embargoes and squeezing the finances

:27:05. > :27:09.of Isil. There was a resolution in February and we should continue to

:27:10. > :27:13.support although 's measures. He asked about dangerous incidents and

:27:14. > :27:19.the potential for those. There is a de reflection between what Russia is

:27:20. > :27:26.doing and what the coalition is doing. As to what happened in

:27:27. > :27:30.Turkey, we have to get the bottom of that, but we have permission to fly

:27:31. > :27:37.over Turkish airspace and Turkey is our ally in this conflict. He asked

:27:38. > :27:46.whether what we are planning will help the transition. I think yes.

:27:47. > :27:50.The existence of Isil, with the so-called caliphate, is to deny the

:27:51. > :27:56.territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria, so we can have a future Syria

:27:57. > :28:00.with the existence of this caliphate is taking over such a large

:28:01. > :28:13.proportion of the territory. When we look to the future of Syria, it will

:28:14. > :28:17.meet the involvement of moderate Sunnis. He asked about the impact of

:28:18. > :28:23.action on the threat level to this country. That is why I called it the

:28:24. > :28:28.chairman of the joint intelligence committee and the head of MI5. Their

:28:29. > :28:35.view is we are already at the very highest level we could be in terms

:28:36. > :28:41.of threats from Isil. Again, this is about learning the lessons of Iraq.

:28:42. > :28:50.We have this architecture and general intelligence committee, and

:28:51. > :28:54.I cleared my statement with them. On the issue of civilian casualties,

:28:55. > :28:58.which is important, I believe the truth of the matter is that the

:28:59. > :29:03.British capabilities are one of the best ways to reduce civilian

:29:04. > :29:08.casualties. In a year and three months of the action we have taken

:29:09. > :29:11.in Iraq, there have been no reports of civilian casualties. We believe

:29:12. > :29:19.we have some of the most accurate weapons known to man, so I think

:29:20. > :29:22.extending our action into Syria is likely to reduce casualties rather

:29:23. > :29:28.than increase them. Finally, he asked about unintended consequences

:29:29. > :29:32.and the recent history. We can have a bigger debate about the action we

:29:33. > :29:38.plan to take around the world, but in my view, we have two recognise

:29:39. > :29:43.that this poisonous narrative of Islamist extremism is a battle for a

:29:44. > :29:48.generation. We see it in Nigeria, we see it in Somalia, frankly, we see

:29:49. > :29:53.it sometimes an urban country. We have to combat it with everything we

:29:54. > :29:58.have got, with argument, taking away grievances, all those things

:29:59. > :30:02.together. But I believe we thought through the consequences of this

:30:03. > :30:06.action, and in quoting President Obama as he did, it is worth

:30:07. > :30:11.remembering that this American president, who saw that part of his

:30:12. > :30:15.role was withdrawing America from some of these foreign entanglements

:30:16. > :30:21.and taking a different approach, he is not only firmly behind American

:30:22. > :30:22.action in Syria, he is asking America's oldest friend and partner

:30:23. > :30:39.to help out in this vital work. Can I thank the Chancellor for

:30:40. > :30:42.responding positively to the first report on the Foreign Office budget

:30:43. > :30:48.yesterday? Part of the committee has returned early from the region

:30:49. > :30:50.around Isil for this statement. Other colleagues are completing

:30:51. > :30:54.visits to ten capitals in the region visits to ten capitals in the region

:30:55. > :31:00.over this week, and acquiring that regional perspective as part of our

:31:01. > :31:04.enquiry into the Coalition against Isil, as was our initial report

:31:05. > :31:12.which addressed the issue of British air strikes over Syria. Behind

:31:13. > :31:16.that's it the bigger question of Britain's involvement in the

:31:17. > :31:21.Coalition and whether it has the strategy to achieve the aim of

:31:22. > :31:31.defeating Isil in Syria and Iraq. Does he agree that getting the

:31:32. > :31:37.politics right in Iraq and Syria is the immediate priority, and we must

:31:38. > :31:40.not lose focus on Baghdad? The committee will discuss its pure

:31:41. > :31:49.early next week. And we will also want to report to the House on the

:31:50. > :31:52.prospects for success in the Coalition strategy. Will my right

:31:53. > :31:55.honourable friend come before the committee in two months to give

:31:56. > :32:02.evidence and implementation of this strategy laid out today? Is he aware

:32:03. > :32:07.that in light of the error and his response to the committee, it is now

:32:08. > :32:13.my personal view that on balance the country would be best served by this

:32:14. > :32:19.House supporting his judgment that the United Kingdom should play a

:32:20. > :32:23.full role in the Coalition to best support and shape the politics, thus

:32:24. > :32:32.eventual ideological defeat of Isil? eventual ideological defeat of Isil?

:32:33. > :32:37.Can I thank first of all for coming back to be with us today. Thank him

:32:38. > :32:43.said today about the decision he has said today about the decision he has

:32:44. > :32:46.reached with this difficult decision we all have to make. He is

:32:47. > :32:51.absolutely right that any action we take must be nested in an overall

:32:52. > :32:56.strategy, which I have tried to set out. He is right that the politics

:32:57. > :32:59.of the region are crucial in our understanding of this. Most

:33:00. > :33:04.important of all, trying to make important of all, trying to make

:33:05. > :33:12.sure that Iraq makes progress to being a more pluralistic and solid

:33:13. > :33:26.country that does not face the risk of Isil. The politics and the action

:33:27. > :33:39.go together. He asked if I will come back to his committee and the House

:33:40. > :33:45.come back in any way that people come back in any way that people

:33:46. > :33:45.want me to, whether it is making a want me to, whether it is making a

:33:46. > :33:57.regular update if we decide to go regular update if we decide to go

:33:58. > :33:58.ahead with action, or appeared in front of his committee to go

:33:59. > :33:58.detailed questions. As in all detailed questions. As in

:33:59. > :33:58.things, I am the House's servant. things, I am the House's

:33:59. > :33:59.Can I begin by thanking the Prime Can I begin by thanking the Prime

:34:00. > :33:59.Minister for advanced viewing of his statement. Given the seriousness of

:34:00. > :34:00.with, it was valuable to have the with, it was valuable to have the

:34:01. > :34:01.briefing last night. In the Scottish briefing last night. In the Scottish

:34:02. > :34:08.National Party, we share the concerns of everyone in this House

:34:09. > :34:14.and the country about the terrorist threat by Daesh. The SNP strongly

:34:15. > :34:17.supports the international supports the international

:34:18. > :34:19.initiative on Syria agreed in Vienna, to secure a ceasefire

:34:20. > :34:25.Syria. The transition to stabilise Syria. The transition to stabilise

:34:26. > :34:27.government and countering terrorist groups including Daesh. We believe

:34:28. > :34:32.these aims will only be secured through agreement and long-term

:34:33. > :34:39.Prime Minister, how is the UK Prime Minister, how is the UK

:34:40. > :34:44.supporting the initiative to secure the ceasefire, the political

:34:45. > :34:48.transition and combating terrorist like Daesh, and planning for the

:34:49. > :34:53.long-term reconstruction and stability and support? Yesterday I

:34:54. > :34:55.asked two questions about Syria which the Prime Minister did not

:34:56. > :35:07.answer. I would like to repeat them today. How will the UK plan secured

:35:08. > :35:10.peace on the ground and Syria? Which ground forces will take, hold and

:35:11. > :35:21.administered territories captured from Isil in Syria? How many Syrian

:35:22. > :35:25.troops are in the north-east of Syria on the front line against

:35:26. > :35:29.Daesh, as opposed to countering Daesh, as opposed to countering

:35:30. > :35:35.Syrian regime forces? How will the UK plan long-term stability and

:35:36. > :35:40.reconstruction in Syria? The UK spent 13 times more bombing Libya

:35:41. > :35:45.run on its post-conflict stability and reconstruction. As I asked

:35:46. > :35:47.yesterday, how much does the Prime Minister estimate the total cost of

:35:48. > :35:51.reconstruction will be, and does he think the amount in his statement

:35:52. > :35:56.today will be sufficient? Two years ago the Prime Minister urged us to

:35:57. > :36:00.bomb the opponents of Daesh in Syria. That would probably have

:36:01. > :36:05.strengthened this terrorist organisation. Today the Prime

:36:06. > :36:10.Minister wants us to launch a bombing campaign without effective

:36:11. > :36:15.ground support in place or a fully costed reconstruction and stability

:36:16. > :36:19.plan. The Prime Minister asked us to consider his plan, we have listened

:36:20. > :36:24.closely. However he questions posed by the foreign affairs select

:36:25. > :36:30.committee remain unanswered. And unless the Prime Minister answers

:36:31. > :36:35.these questions satisfactorily, the Scottish National Party will not

:36:36. > :36:38.vote for air strikes in Syria. Can I thank him for paying tribute to my

:36:39. > :36:42.National Security Agency is, who has been working hard to provide factual

:36:43. > :36:47.briefings on a Privy Council basis briefings on a Privy Council basis

:36:48. > :36:50.to parties across the House of Commons. I think he is right that

:36:51. > :36:54.what is required is political agreement and the long-term

:36:55. > :36:57.reconstruction of Syria. Argument is not to disagree with that, my

:36:58. > :37:03.arguments is that as well as that we need to take action to help protect

:37:04. > :37:06.us against terrorism we have seen on the streets of Paris and elsewhere.

:37:07. > :37:11.He asked some technical questions about how we were supporting the

:37:12. > :37:19.renegotiation process in Vienna. We're playing a full part in it, and

:37:20. > :37:26.working with United Nations envoys who are trying to bring the parties

:37:27. > :37:29.together. In terms of two specific questions, there are the Free Syrian

:37:30. > :37:32.Army on the ground, and the Kurdish forces, which makes it a more

:37:33. > :37:39.complicated which are banned Iraq, where we have Iraq security forces.

:37:40. > :37:42.But we can help these forces to hold on to hold and take ground and

:37:43. > :37:43.relieve suffering, and we have seen that with what has happened around

:37:44. > :38:08.to -- three. -- Kobani. The question to -- three. -- Kobani. The question

:38:09. > :38:13.comes up, can we wait for Isil to have a partner to take some action

:38:14. > :38:17.that will degrade Isil and its capabilities to do us harm? He asked

:38:18. > :38:21.about the long-term reconstruction of Syria. As we debated yesterday

:38:22. > :38:23.with the Autumn Statement, we have one of the largest development

:38:24. > :38:28.budgets anywhere in the world. I have said we would be prepared to

:38:29. > :38:31.commit ?1 billion to that sort of reconstruction, and I think the

:38:32. > :38:37.world would come together when there is a new government in Syria, and

:38:38. > :38:39.the Syrian people who are many of them currently outside of the

:38:40. > :38:42.country, they would not be left wanting support. They would get the

:38:43. > :38:51.support of Britain and I believe the rest of this developed world. He has

:38:52. > :38:57.proper part with allies on the proper part with allies on the

:38:58. > :39:02.meaningless international border, but also for the political process

:39:03. > :39:05.we can have a voice in bringing Americans closer to the Russians and

:39:06. > :39:12.the Saudis and her closer to the Iranians. Does he accept that in the

:39:13. > :39:19.medium-term, we have to look for can produce stability and the more

:39:20. > :39:24.peaceful situation, and we may have to prepare ourselves for something

:39:25. > :39:29.that falls far short of what a liberal Western democracy would look

:39:30. > :39:31.like. It is not the experience of the Arab Spring that going straight

:39:32. > :39:41.to democratic elections does not to democratic elections does not

:39:42. > :39:43.agreement is going to involve some agreement is going to involve

:39:44. > :39:45.rather unpleasant or being rather unpleasant or being

:39:46. > :39:52.would naturally be allies, and would naturally be allies, and

:39:53. > :39:57.President Assad and other people may have to be involved because the big

:39:58. > :40:04.enemy is Isil, which is dangerous, and not possible to engage in any

:40:05. > :40:06.political negotiations. He speaks with great wisdom about these

:40:07. > :40:11.matters and it is important to have his support. He has never been an

:40:12. > :40:15.unquestioning support of military action, and he thinks these things

:40:16. > :40:19.about the future government of about the future government of

:40:20. > :40:22.Syria, the transition that needs to take place, following short of some

:40:23. > :40:29.of this democratic norms we want to of this democratic norms we want to

:40:30. > :40:32.see, of course that is likely. When I say that I believe Assad cannot be

:40:33. > :40:42.part of the long-term government of Syria, in many ways that is not a

:40:43. > :40:43.political preference, the blood has been shed means he will not command

:40:44. > :40:48.the support of the Syrian people. Do the support of the Syrian people. Do

:40:49. > :40:55.I believe that a transition in Syria will produce a democracy? Of course

:40:56. > :41:03.it won't, but it might give us a partner that could make us safer.

:41:04. > :41:05.Can I remind him that two years ago he was equally eloquent in telling

:41:06. > :41:12.us how essential it was to bomb the us how essential it was to bomb the

:41:13. > :41:17.Assad regime? I believe that the decision taken to the House in July

:41:18. > :41:21.we followed his advice, the we followed his advice, the

:41:22. > :41:28.situation in Syria would be even worse than it is now. With the Prime

:41:29. > :41:36.Minister agree that the crux of the issues of this House is this. Would

:41:37. > :41:42.military action help to defeat Isis? I happen to believe the answer is

:41:43. > :41:45.no, and I wonder how many members of the House really believe it will

:41:46. > :41:52.make any real difference in defeating this heated death cult. I

:41:53. > :41:56.do not want to re-enter all the arguments about chemical weapons

:41:57. > :42:00.used. All I will say is that I listened to his views, but I also

:42:01. > :42:03.think of the thousands of people including children who have been

:42:04. > :42:08.killed by his barrel bombs using chemical weapons since we held the

:42:09. > :42:14.vote. He asked the right question, will this make us safer or not? Will

:42:15. > :42:20.it help us to degrade Isil or not? It is the views of our closest

:42:21. > :42:23.allies and military and intelligence experts, and those responsible for

:42:24. > :42:26.our domestic security, all of those people are saying to us that we

:42:27. > :42:32.the Coalition to help make us safer, the Coalition to help make us safer,

:42:33. > :42:34.which is why I bring forward the statement and with the support of

:42:35. > :42:39.the House I will bring forward a vote. Following the limited but

:42:40. > :42:46.important progress on the political important progress on the political

:42:47. > :42:54.track in Vienna and the unanimous adoption by the United Nations

:42:55. > :42:58.resolution 2249 on Isil, is it not clear that the Prime Minister's

:42:59. > :43:02.considered response today is absolutely compelling. Is this not

:43:03. > :43:05.responsibility to protect innocent responsibility to protect innocent

:43:06. > :43:14.civilians both here and in the civilians both here and in the

:43:15. > :43:17.United Kingdom and in Syria? I think this is about discharging our

:43:18. > :43:24.responsibilities, chiefly to our own citizens. It is my view that this

:43:25. > :43:27.action will help overtime to make us safer. We will never be safe while

:43:28. > :43:37.Isil exists, while the so-called caliphate exist, and we demonstrated

:43:38. > :43:40.in Iraq that we can take its territory, we can destroy its

:43:41. > :43:43.infrastructure and make progress, but we are hampered by not being

:43:44. > :43:48.agree that the eradication of Isil agree that the eradication of Isil

:43:49. > :43:55.is crucial, we should not put off this decision. I am sure the Prime

:43:56. > :44:01.Minister is correct to say that the continued existence of the so-called

:44:02. > :44:07.caliphate is an inspiration to violent extremists in the Middle

:44:08. > :44:10.East and our own country. Did he perhaps give some indication, I know

:44:11. > :44:14.these things are still subject to negotiation however, about what the

:44:15. > :44:22.characteristics of a legend met characteristics of a legend met

:44:23. > :44:23.transitional government might be? Letting agree with him about the

:44:24. > :44:26.so-called caliphate. There are so-called caliphate. There are

:44:27. > :44:29.military objectives in terms of military objectives in terms of

:44:30. > :44:35.trying to break up the terrorist training camps infrastructure and

:44:36. > :44:39.the terrorists themselves, but there is a bigger picture, which is while

:44:40. > :44:44.the so-called caliphate exist side and believe we are safe, so we

:44:45. > :44:47.should be part of its dismantling. The question he asks about the

:44:48. > :44:50.characteristics of transition, this is what is being discussed in

:44:51. > :44:56.Vienna, but it should start with ceasefires. It should then proceed

:44:57. > :44:59.what a transitional government and what a transitional government and

:45:00. > :45:03.institutions would look like, and then to be followed probably

:45:04. > :45:11.by-elections and at some stage a transition away from the currently

:45:12. > :45:14.do ship. -- leadership. This will not be a scientific process, but to

:45:15. > :45:20.end it is political transition that end it is political transition that

:45:21. > :45:25.will help us to complete the final destruction of Isil. Military force

:45:26. > :45:28.cannot do it on its own. There is a political, diplomatic and military

:45:29. > :45:32.solution and we need to do all of it.

:45:33. > :45:42.Many members, including me personally, entirely agree with the

:45:43. > :45:48.Prime Minister that Isil must be crushed militarily in Syria and the

:45:49. > :45:55.crushing will indeed have to be military, but as he acknowledged

:45:56. > :46:00.yesterday, air strikes alone will not be effective. They have got to

:46:01. > :46:05.be in court order nation with credible ground forces. The

:46:06. > :46:11.suggestion that there are 70,000 non-Islamist moderate ground forces

:46:12. > :46:18.is a revelation to me and I suspect most other members in this house.

:46:19. > :46:23.Adequate ground forces depend on the participation of the Syrian army, so

:46:24. > :46:32.if the dictator Assad refuses to resign, which is the greater danger

:46:33. > :46:38.to our national interest? Syria under him or the continued existence

:46:39. > :46:47.and expansion of Isil? Because you may have to choose between one and

:46:48. > :46:52.the other. There is a lot of grounds of agreement between us. We agree on

:46:53. > :46:56.the dangers of Isil, we agree it needs to be crushed, we agree we

:46:57. > :47:05.will need the involvement of ground forces, and we also agree that we

:47:06. > :47:10.need an Isil- first strategy, that Isil is the greater threat to the

:47:11. > :47:15.United Kingdom. I think the only area of disagreement between this

:47:16. > :47:21.one on a technical point. The technical point is what I have said

:47:22. > :47:26.about 70,000 moderate forces in Syria is not my figure, it is the

:47:27. > :47:30.considered opinion of the joint intelligence committee, a committed

:47:31. > :47:34.it that was set up and given independence to avoid any of the

:47:35. > :47:39.mistakes that we had in the past of the potential misuse of intelligence

:47:40. > :47:45.and other information. It is they are considered view that document

:47:46. > :47:51.has been entirely cleared by them, has has my statement. The other

:47:52. > :47:55.issue we have to come to is that in time, the best ground troops should

:47:56. > :48:01.be the Syrian army. My view is that Bobby Moore likely to happen after a

:48:02. > :48:05.political transition has taken place in Syria, and my contention is the

:48:06. > :48:09.problem believing it can be done with Assad is that you will never

:48:10. > :48:15.get the ceasefire, you'll never get the Brit a patient of the majority

:48:16. > :48:21.of Sunnis while Assad is still there. But I think the area of disk

:48:22. > :48:26.agreement between us is narrowing, as is the area of disagreement

:48:27. > :48:32.between Britain and America and France. We all see the need for

:48:33. > :48:39.political and military intervention. The Prime Minister has made a strong

:48:40. > :48:46.moral and legal case for defeating what is EU totalitarianism in both

:48:47. > :48:49.Syria and Iraq. The real question is obviously the practical one and that

:48:50. > :48:55.is what we want to consider. If I press him on this issue, given the

:48:56. > :49:01.different Russian objectives in Syria, how will he avoid weaving

:49:02. > :49:05.support or appealing to give support to Assad forces and becoming

:49:06. > :49:16.appended on Assad forces and how will he avoid giving succour to Isil

:49:17. > :49:22.in its recruitment in the region. This is the important issue. We have

:49:23. > :49:33.been very clear, are target is Isil, not the regime, but we will be help

:49:34. > :49:41.in our combating of Isil if the Sunni majority in Syria believe we

:49:42. > :49:47.need a transition away from Assad. He can't and the long term be

:49:48. > :49:52.running that country. Russia sees the danger of Isil and is attacking

:49:53. > :49:57.it, we see the dangers of Isil and are attacking it. The difference is

:49:58. > :50:03.that Russia is still attacking that moderate Syrian forces that we

:50:04. > :50:06.believe, in time, could be part of a genuine transition in Syria and

:50:07. > :50:11.would have the support of all the Syrian people. We do have ways of

:50:12. > :50:19.the conflicting, I met with President Vladimir Putin at a

:50:20. > :50:25.conference. We believe the attack on the Russian airliner will bring home

:50:26. > :50:34.to the Russian people that this needs and Isil -1st strategy and

:50:35. > :50:38.that is where we should focus. I congratulate you are setting out a

:50:39. > :50:43.comprehensive approach on that this strategy. Does he accept that for

:50:44. > :50:47.the United Kingdom not to act is in itself a policy position that will

:50:48. > :50:52.have consequences, because the jihadists heater is not for what we

:50:53. > :50:56.do, but for who we are what we stand for. Does he agree that we do not

:50:57. > :51:01.have the luxury of not confronting Isil, because they have chosen to

:51:02. > :51:04.confront us? The question is do we confront them over there or

:51:05. > :51:17.increasingly take the rest of confronting them here? -- take the

:51:18. > :51:20.risk. It is my judgment and the judgment of those independent,

:51:21. > :51:26.impartial, highly trained advisers on security and military issues who

:51:27. > :51:34.take the same view, that inaction is the greater risk. I thank the Prime

:51:35. > :51:38.Minister for his statements. There are understandable knee jerk

:51:39. > :51:44.reactions on both sides to the horror of Paris and Beirut. There

:51:45. > :51:47.will be those who say intervene, there will be those who see

:51:48. > :51:51.intervene at all costs, and there will be those who say do not

:51:52. > :51:58.intervene, no matter what the evidence points that. The Liberal

:51:59. > :52:03.Democrats have set out five criteria against which we can judge the

:52:04. > :52:07.statement. On that basis, can I press him on two points? The Prime

:52:08. > :52:11.Minister recognises that air strikes alone will not defeat Isil. He has

:52:12. > :52:15.already heard that he will need to give much more evidence to this

:52:16. > :52:19.house to convince it that the ground operations that are there have the

:52:20. > :52:24.capability and credibility to deliver on the ground, that twitchy

:52:25. > :52:32.nose needs to be delivered. What role will golf states play in

:52:33. > :52:37.delivering this strategy, if that's the way we choose to go. Also in the

:52:38. > :52:43.statement, there is a reference to humanitarian aid, but he will now do

:52:44. > :52:47.my debate can help an innocent family dodge a bomb. That is no

:52:48. > :52:52.reference in his statement to establishing safe havens or no -bomb

:52:53. > :53:02.zones for civilians when this action takes place. Will he answer that

:53:03. > :53:08.question? His party is clearly wanting to engage with the

:53:09. > :53:10.argument, think very carefully and consider the national security

:53:11. > :53:14.arguments before making a judgment. I know the National Security adviser

:53:15. > :53:17.was pleased to be the outside and stands ready to brief them and

:53:18. > :53:23.answer any detailed questions they might have. I take very seriously

:53:24. > :53:29.what happened in Paris, I know absolutely that could just as well

:53:30. > :53:35.happen in the UK or Belgium or elsewhere in Europe, and the threat

:53:36. > :53:39.we face is very severe. But I want us to consider this, I don't want

:53:40. > :53:44.anyone to feel that due process hasn't been followed, so that people

:53:45. > :53:48.agree with the case being put and they can in all conscience vote to

:53:49. > :53:54.support it. In terms of the two specific questions, we will continue

:53:55. > :53:58.to deliver humanitarian aid. On the no -bomb zones, the difficulty with

:53:59. > :54:05.those is they have to be enforced, and that can require that taking out

:54:06. > :54:08.of air defences, which would actually spread the conflict wider

:54:09. > :54:13.and also does in many cases require the presence of ground troops. We

:54:14. > :54:18.would be putting in ground troops for those purposes. I don't want to

:54:19. > :54:24.declare the safe zone unless it is genuinely safe. But what we want is

:54:25. > :54:27.a growing part of Iraq and Syria to be safe, because we have a political

:54:28. > :54:30.agreement to deliver the ceasefire is a growing part of Iraq and Syria

:54:31. > :54:32.to be safe, because we have a political agreement to deliver the

:54:33. > :54:37.ceasefires we need. On the question of ground troops and the role of

:54:38. > :54:42.Gulf countries, they, on the whole, have been helping to fund the

:54:43. > :54:48.moderate Syrian opposition, who need to play a part in the future of this

:54:49. > :54:54.country, and the strongly support the action Britain is proposing to

:54:55. > :54:59.take. He's absolutely right that puts on the are ultimately essential

:55:00. > :55:06.if bombing is to be relevant. I would like him to convince me that

:55:07. > :55:10.what he refers to as the Freeze Syrian Army actually exists rather

:55:11. > :55:17.than is a label we applied to a ragbag group of clans and tribal

:55:18. > :55:22.forces with no coherent thought. I'd like him to convince me there is a

:55:23. > :55:25.moderate group we can back, whereas in times of constitutional

:55:26. > :55:29.dissolution, it is almost a law of human nature that people rallied to

:55:30. > :55:36.the most extreme and forceful advocate of their group. There are

:55:37. > :55:40.no moderates. I'd like to believe these forces can be persuaded to act

:55:41. > :55:46.against the Islamist 's, with the last time he wanted and expected

:55:47. > :55:51.them to act against Assad. I very much respect the point of view he

:55:52. > :55:54.takes, because he is absolutely asking the right question about what

:55:55. > :56:00.troops are on the ground to help us. The truth is there are moderate

:56:01. > :56:07.forces, there are the forces of the Three Syrian Army, they have a role

:56:08. > :56:10.in the southern part of the country, abutting the Jordan border. They

:56:11. > :56:16.have prevented Isil from taking vital ground. We can see the effect

:56:17. > :56:21.when we work either with them or Kurdish forces, we can see the

:56:22. > :56:26.effect of their taking ground, holding ground and administering

:56:27. > :56:30.territory, as I said. Let me add this point, there is one sure way to

:56:31. > :56:36.make sure that there is only one choice for Assyrians who don't back

:56:37. > :56:43.Assad to join Isil, and that will be of we don't support the moderate

:56:44. > :56:51.forces. Most people in Syria are not massive fans of Assad or Isil. Most

:56:52. > :56:56.people want a pluralist country with the king get on with their lives.

:56:57. > :57:00.That is what other countries are fighting for and that is why they

:57:01. > :57:04.deserve our support. The Prime Minister makes a strong case to the

:57:05. > :57:09.house today, but he will be aware that members on both sides of the

:57:10. > :57:14.house will want reassuring that he and his government will indeed show

:57:15. > :57:18.the persistence and patience required over many months to get

:57:19. > :57:24.agreement on both political strategy and reconstruction in Syria and

:57:25. > :57:32.Iraq. What reassured us can he give that his government will provide

:57:33. > :57:38.that? The commitment I can give is that this is the number one national

:57:39. > :57:43.security issue we face, but also the migration crisis in Europe is a

:57:44. > :57:46.massive question for all European countries, Britain included, and it

:57:47. > :57:50.deserves a maximum amount of attention and resources we can give

:57:51. > :57:56.it. I believe will have to be patient and persistent, not just on

:57:57. > :58:00.the diplomatic and humanitarian angles, where I believe we have a

:58:01. > :58:04.good track record. We didn't suddenly respond to the Syrian

:58:05. > :58:10.refugee crisis, we have been working on that over the past four years. We

:58:11. > :58:15.will have persistence in the military action we take, just as we

:58:16. > :58:21.have in Iraq, where are action has led to a 30% reduction in Isil -held

:58:22. > :58:25.territory. The strategy we are pursuing does take time, because

:58:26. > :58:32.you're working with the government on the ground in Iraq and forces in

:58:33. > :58:40.Syria, so you can expect immediate results, but over time, it will make

:58:41. > :58:45.us safer. If the attack, God forbid, had happened in London and

:58:46. > :58:49.not in Paris, I believe that today the British people would be

:58:50. > :58:53.outraged, dismayed and upset that our allies did not have our back,

:58:54. > :58:58.and that their politicians were taking so long to procrastinate

:58:59. > :59:04.about whether to come to their help. By Minister, we now you need our

:59:05. > :59:22.vote in this house to give you support. Given your statement

:59:23. > :59:27.today, we asked the good men and women of the opposition to come to

:59:28. > :59:31.our aid sooner rather than later. In putting the question of what we

:59:32. > :59:36.would be feeling if there was an attack on London rather than Paris,

:59:37. > :59:39.I think she makes a good point. Let's be frank, this attack could

:59:40. > :59:44.just as well have been in London as it was in Paris, and we should

:59:45. > :59:48.recognise what a closer line is we have with France, what a closer line

:59:49. > :59:54.is we have the United States, and how together we can make our world

:59:55. > :59:58.safer. As for this boat, which I hope will be held, although we would

:59:59. > :00:06.hold it if there a danger of losing it. It's not of government pride,

:00:07. > :00:10.it's about the importance of national security and the message it

:00:11. > :00:15.would send her enemies. I'm trying to make sure we draw together the

:00:16. > :00:17.biggest possible coalition of members of Parliament from all sides

:00:18. > :00:23.of the hose to support what I promise we'll be in motion that

:00:24. > :00:28.stresses the importance of strategy, every element of that strategy, the

:00:29. > :00:32.importance of post-conflict reconstruction. I figure many points

:00:33. > :00:35.in the motion that was passed at the Labour Party conference on this

:00:36. > :00:39.issue that have either been addressed, such as the need for the

:00:40. > :00:43.UN resolution, or can be addressed through the action we are taking.

:00:44. > :00:47.Everyone has to come to their own decision, but I don't want to give

:00:48. > :00:59.anyone a way out of making that decision over some mistake over

:01:00. > :01:01.process. That wouldn't be right. Prime Minister for his statement,

:01:02. > :01:05.for the briefings we have received that a national level and for the

:01:06. > :01:10.discussions in recent days. At times like this it is right to thank our

:01:11. > :01:11.brave and precious service men and servicewomen who stand ready to do

:01:12. > :01:21.their duty. Can I say that we know their duty. Can I say that we know

:01:22. > :01:23.from experience the consequences of appeasing and indulging terrorism

:01:24. > :01:33.for too long, and will the Prime Minister confirmed today that unlike

:01:34. > :01:37.last time, the action foreshadowed today is for Isil terrorists and no

:01:38. > :01:42.one else. I would like to confirm that for us the important issues are

:01:43. > :01:47.an effective overall strategy, the targeting of terrorists, and there

:01:48. > :01:51.is an end point. We stand ready to do what is in the best interests of

:01:52. > :01:55.our national security. If it protects our people here and abroad

:01:56. > :02:01.then we must act. I commend the Prime Minister on the statement. Can

:02:02. > :02:05.I thank him and say that he speaks for the whole country thanking the

:02:06. > :02:08.Armed Forces for the work they are doing to combat Isil. I can give him

:02:09. > :02:12.the assurance that we are speaking the assurance that we are speaking

:02:13. > :02:15.about action against Isil, not anyone else. I can also say that I

:02:16. > :02:22.agree that being clear about strategy and targeting and about the

:02:23. > :02:31.end point of what we are trying to achieve, they are all very much part

:02:32. > :02:35.of our approach. Regional powers and allies in the Middle East believe

:02:36. > :02:39.that in the absence of a realistic long-term strategy and proper local

:02:40. > :02:46.knowledge, we risk repeating the errors we made in our interventions

:02:47. > :02:48.in Iraq, Afghanistan after 2006, and Libya. Key questions remain

:02:49. > :02:53.unanswered. How best to combat unanswered. How best to combat

:02:54. > :03:03.sectarianism and extremism and the ideology that all extremist groups

:03:04. > :03:06.feed off, not just Daesh. We have been talking about business flows

:03:07. > :03:10.for over a year now, with no affect. I ask him to look again at his

:03:11. > :03:22.figure for 70,000 Free Syrian Army. Because we have been told... Can I

:03:23. > :03:25.ask this, without these answers, air strikes will only reinforce the

:03:26. > :03:32.West's feel you're in the region generally at a time when already

:03:33. > :03:37.been to many craft chasing too many targets. I believe what they are too

:03:38. > :03:43.our country, but I would agree with our country, but I would agree with

:03:44. > :03:50.him that we have to combat our ideology, and that is a big part of

:03:51. > :03:52.our strategy, what we're saying all our schools and universities must

:03:53. > :04:00.do, what communities must do together. This is something that we

:04:01. > :04:11.have taken more action on than any other countries. Regarding starving

:04:12. > :04:15.Isil of resources, I agree, I will be the first to push this. Remember

:04:16. > :04:20.they get their money from selling oil to President Assad. Get their

:04:21. > :04:26.money from owning and occupying such a large amount of territory. On the

:04:27. > :04:34.70,000 figure, this is not my figure. These figures come directly

:04:35. > :04:39.from security and intelligence experts who advise me, now filtered

:04:40. > :04:43.process, set up under the Butler process, set up under the Butler

:04:44. > :04:45.enquiry after the Iraq war. I am determined we learned the lessons of

:04:46. > :04:49.that conflict, but surely it cannot that conflict, but surely it cannot

:04:50. > :04:56.be a lesson that when we are threatened and can make a difference

:04:57. > :05:01.we should somehow stand back. The Prime Minister was commended,

:05:02. > :05:06.rightly, for not lashing out militarily after the provocation of

:05:07. > :05:11.the atrocities of Tunisia, but he is wrong now to ignore the real threat

:05:12. > :05:18.the Isil plan, which is to escalate a regional war into a world war

:05:19. > :05:28.between Christians and Muslims, and wouldn't our action now repeat what

:05:29. > :05:32.we did in 2003, when we deepened the conflict, deepening the divide

:05:33. > :05:39.between Muslims and Christians, that is their strategy. And want this

:05:40. > :05:44.action now lead to more? The great threat is home-grown terrorism, and

:05:45. > :05:50.isn't his action likely to increase recruits to terrorists, to jihadis,

:05:51. > :05:55.honourable gentleman deeply wants to honourable gentleman deeply wants to

:05:56. > :06:01.have the peaceful world that we all dream of, and we have something in

:06:02. > :06:07.common with that. Isil have taken action against us already. They were

:06:08. > :06:37.behind the murder of the people on the beach in June as the. They

:06:38. > :07:01.butchered our friends and allies and citizens in Paris. In terms of the

:07:02. > :07:04.battle between Muslims and Christians, that is what we want to

:07:05. > :07:05.avoid. It is in working with ... As avoid. It is in working with ... As

:07:06. > :07:06.for Isil, they butchered Muslims in vast numbers, which is why they have

:07:07. > :07:06.sub contract that work-out to anyone sub contract that work-out to

:07:07. > :07:07.else. For those of us who saw else. For those of us who saw

:07:08. > :07:07.another Prime Minister at the another Prime Minister at the

:07:08. > :07:07.dispatch box and felt we voted to dispatch box and felt we voted to

:07:08. > :07:08.take military action under false take military action under false

:07:09. > :07:08.premise, can I thank the Prime premise, can I thank the Prime

:07:09. > :07:08.Minister for coming to this House Minister for coming to this

:07:09. > :07:09.and his approach and openness over and his approach and openness

:07:10. > :07:10.what I believe is a very real and what I believe is a very real and

:07:11. > :07:16.present threat to citizens in the UK? There can be no doubt that we

:07:17. > :07:26.would bring a very specific military capability through our position

:07:27. > :07:30.guided missiles. If and when we join in this military action in Syria, is

:07:31. > :07:34.the Prime Minister satisfied that we have sufficient stocks and

:07:35. > :07:40.manufacturing capability to sustain and fulfil our military objectives

:07:41. > :07:44.in Syria? I can confirm we do have sufficient stocks, but let me

:07:45. > :07:51.respond to the wider point. It is respond to the wider point. It is

:07:52. > :07:54.true that what happened in 2003 over Iraq poisoned the well in many ways

:07:55. > :08:01.about the debate about these issues, about the debate about these issues,

:08:02. > :08:08.and I have tried to go about this in as clearly as possible. The widest

:08:09. > :08:11.possible Coalition, strong Arab and Muslim partners, trying to take the

:08:12. > :08:16.House through this every step of the way. But what I would say to

:08:17. > :08:21.colleagues is that we mustn't let 2003 and decisions about Iraq hold

:08:22. > :08:24.us back from taking correct us back from taking correct

:08:25. > :08:29.decisions after proper consideration. To do so, it is not

:08:30. > :08:32.just about letting down allies of anyone, we would be letting down

:08:33. > :08:44.ourselves and the people we are here to represent. Isn't it essential in

:08:45. > :08:52.any prelude to a war to be sure of your allies and of the objectives?

:08:53. > :08:59.Isn't it a fact that Turkey has been buying oil from Isil, they used

:09:00. > :09:05.Turkey's trucks to store it, they have been bombing the Kurds, who

:09:06. > :09:15.have been fighting Isil. They shot down a Russian jet, even though

:09:16. > :09:19.Russia is wanting to fight Isil. He has got an objective to get rid of

:09:20. > :09:25.Assad, a Russian ally has got the opposite objective. What a crazy

:09:26. > :09:35.war. Enemies to the right of us, enemies to the left. Keep out. The

:09:36. > :09:40.one thing I agree is that we should be clear about our allies and

:09:41. > :09:46.objectives, which include not just the United States and France, but

:09:47. > :09:51.also Gulf states and others in the region who are almost coming

:09:52. > :09:56.together in an alliance to get rid of Isil. We also need to be clear

:09:57. > :10:02.about our objectives, and that is the military targets I spoke about,

:10:03. > :10:11.but also stopping the caliphate. Regarding smuggling, they have taken

:10:12. > :10:16.action to try to stop this, confiscating oil and trying to seal

:10:17. > :10:26.the border. Should they do more? Of course they should, and that is part

:10:27. > :10:30.of our strategy. Last night two senior French military officers told

:10:31. > :10:39.me how much their country would really appreciate it if we joined

:10:40. > :10:51.them fully in taking the fight to Syria. Pinpoint accurate bombing by

:10:52. > :10:55.the RAAF would help destroy Daesh. I applaud the Prime Minister for

:10:56. > :11:00.trying to get parliamentary approval for defensive action in Syria, and

:11:01. > :11:08.ask that we bring this highly potent gesture to a vote of this House as

:11:09. > :11:15.soon as next week because our allies really want us to prove that we are

:11:16. > :11:19.fully with them. Red meat a tribute to my honourable friend. He knows

:11:20. > :11:22.the importance of making these decisions after careful

:11:23. > :11:32.consideration, and he knows the importance of standing by allies. I

:11:33. > :11:40.thank the Prime Minister for the statement. I was on the bench in

:11:41. > :11:45.2000 and -- 2002 when Tony Blair discussed the war on Iraq. Plaid

:11:46. > :11:49.us it was a matter of integrity. So us it was a matter of integrity. So

:11:50. > :11:53.I would ask the Prime Minister before he comes to this House again

:11:54. > :11:58.to put the case for more award to the vote, but he should examine his

:11:59. > :12:05.conscience, all choices short of conscience, all choices short of

:12:06. > :12:11.warming, as we all must, as it is a case of life and death, but for all

:12:12. > :12:15.agree this is a matter of integrity, agree this is a matter of integrity,

:12:16. > :12:22.and there is no part of me that wants to take part in a -- any

:12:23. > :12:32.military action which I do not believe is 100% for our safety. I

:12:33. > :12:41.know the Iraq vote was a time of great difficulty for the House, but

:12:42. > :12:44.we must not let that hold us back from making correct and thought

:12:45. > :12:47.such threat. And we are. The bomb in such threat. And we are. The bomb in

:12:48. > :12:51.Paris that could -- the bomb in Paris that could -- the bomb in

:12:52. > :13:20.Paris, that could have been London. Paris, that could have been London.

:13:21. > :13:20.not. I cannot say we will remove the not. I cannot say we will remove the

:13:21. > :13:21.threat through the action we take, threat through the action we

:13:22. > :13:21.but do I stand here with advice but do I stand here with advice

:13:22. > :13:22.behind me that taking action will degrade and reduce that threat over

:13:23. > :13:22.telling me that. Given Britain's telling me that. Given Britain's

:13:23. > :13:23.historic connections with the historic connections with the

:13:24. > :13:24.region, may I strongly endorse my right honourable friend's view

:13:25. > :13:28.expressed in the memorandum this morning that now is attained scale

:13:29. > :13:35.up defence and shamanic TV and efforts to resolve the conflict. May

:13:36. > :13:45.I urge them to attend to -- intensified discussions with

:13:46. > :13:53.President Putin, who has the ear of Assad. It was because of air forces

:13:54. > :13:58.that stopped Iraq falling into the hands of Isil completely, so it

:13:59. > :14:03.makes no sense to stop at the Iraqi border today. I am grateful for his

:14:04. > :14:08.support. The point he makes about Iraq is potent because there was a

:14:09. > :14:15.danger of Isil overrunning Iraq, which was stopped through a

:14:16. > :14:18.combination of action from this sky, including us and legitimate ground

:14:19. > :14:21.about the importance of discussing about the importance of discussing

:14:22. > :14:27.as I will continue to do. There is a as I will continue to do. There is a

:14:28. > :14:31.gap to us, but I believe it is reducing. I agree that the

:14:32. > :14:35.diplomatic and political process diplomatic and political process

:14:36. > :14:36.must play a key part in our approach to the complex situation in Syria,

:14:37. > :14:41.and credit should be given to the and credit should be given to the

:14:42. > :14:44.part played so far. But with some limited progress coming out of

:14:45. > :14:48.Syria, with address the concerns coming through to the select

:14:49. > :14:52.committee report, that our ability to continue the key diplomatic role

:14:53. > :14:58.will be compromised if we joined the bombing?

:14:59. > :15:06.I think this is a very important question, which is does taking

:15:07. > :15:11.action against Isil in Syria make a political agreement more likely or

:15:12. > :15:16.less likely? I think it makes it more likely, because firstly, you

:15:17. > :15:21.need a Syria with territorial integrity. Unless we deal with Isil,

:15:22. > :15:28.we would have a Syria to have a transition in. She was a moderate

:15:29. > :15:33.Sunni forces in Syria need to play a part in the future of that country,

:15:34. > :15:36.so we should be helping them, including through what we do with

:15:37. > :15:49.Isil, rather than seeing them being wasted away. The cautious way and

:15:50. > :15:58.wise waiver by Minister has said these questions, would you not agree

:15:59. > :16:06.with me big decision taken was in September last year, when we decided

:16:07. > :16:10.to attack Isil. That decision remains today, and some of the

:16:11. > :16:19.decisions now us be taken by Himmler, the generals and

:16:20. > :16:24.intelligence chiefs and not necessarily by the hostages to

:16:25. > :16:29.political fortunate in this house. Looking back to the decision be made

:16:30. > :16:32.about Isil in Iraq, that judgment was the right one and Isil had been

:16:33. > :16:38.pushed back in quite a large weight since that decision. As for coming

:16:39. > :16:42.in front of this house, I have been very clear that I reserve the right

:16:43. > :16:49.to take action in Britain's interest when I need to, but for the

:16:50. > :16:51.meditated action, we have this convention, where there should be a

:16:52. > :17:00.vote in the house before taking action. I find it rather anxious

:17:01. > :17:05.that you seem to be responding on a something must be done, that's not

:17:06. > :17:08.all was the basis for the best decisions. I wonder whether the

:17:09. > :17:14.Prime Minister has received information about strikes in Iraq

:17:15. > :17:17.that have definitely hit civilian areas, the fact that there is an

:17:18. > :17:22.increase in refugees, because they do not know which way to run. We do

:17:23. > :17:27.need to be conscious of the risk of recruitment. The people who bombed

:17:28. > :17:32.London in 2005 and the people who bombed Paris live here on we will

:17:33. > :17:41.not bombed them out of existence. We know this may well increase

:17:42. > :17:46.recruitment of extremists here. This absolutely is not a something must

:17:47. > :17:49.be done strategy. It is about careful consideration bringing

:17:50. > :17:56.together all the parts of the plan, diplomatic, political, humanitarian,

:17:57. > :18:02.reconstruction and military action. The opposite of what she would say

:18:03. > :18:06.is, doing nothing on this front, also has consequences. And those

:18:07. > :18:10.consequences we have to consider very carefully. In terms of

:18:11. > :18:15.dangerous recruitment of Islamist extremists in a room country, as

:18:16. > :18:24.long as that caliphate exists, we are at a greater risk, in my view.

:18:25. > :18:27.May I commend the approach set out in the statement, particularly that

:18:28. > :18:34.he is working with our allies. But can I urge him to President Obama to

:18:35. > :18:40.ask him when the United States is going to show more resolve. Isn't it

:18:41. > :18:46.strange that during the Bosnian conflict, they mounted perhaps 130

:18:47. > :18:51.exercises a day, when every aircraft was cleared to drop or shoot,

:18:52. > :18:57.whereas in Syria, they are doing perhaps three a day and only some

:18:58. > :19:01.aircraft are cleared should drop or shoot. Shouldn't we expect more from

:19:02. > :19:07.the United States of this alliance is going to be successful? I am very

:19:08. > :19:11.grateful for that support. He is right to say it is important to have

:19:12. > :19:17.a clear strategy, to have a set of goals and a clear means to achieve

:19:18. > :19:22.them. In terms of what the Americans are doing, they are bearing a lot of

:19:23. > :19:27.the burden of attacking Isil in Syria, but with other allies,

:19:28. > :19:31.including moderate Arab states. Obviously, the greater part we play

:19:32. > :19:38.in response to their request, the greater influence we can have in the

:19:39. > :19:44.course of the campaign, and indeed, the greater accuracy we can insist

:19:45. > :19:49.on in terms of targeting. The Prime Minister has made a very powerful

:19:50. > :19:53.case this morning. On Tuesday this week, the head of counterterrorism

:19:54. > :19:59.and evidence to the home affairs committee said the threat of Isil in

:20:00. > :20:04.this country was very real. Can I press on two points? Worsley, in an

:20:05. > :20:08.inevitable consequence of an intervention means the migration

:20:09. > :20:15.ices will get worse. As the rest of the EU ready for this? Secondly, he

:20:16. > :20:20.says, he is the servant of the house. We are all servants of the

:20:21. > :20:24.people. Could I invite him to invite leaders of the Muslim community to

:20:25. > :20:37.meet with him at Downing Street, so he can put the case to them as

:20:38. > :20:44.eloquently as he has put it to us? I do believe there are all speaking

:20:45. > :20:49.with the same voice about the risks we face from the caliphate. He is

:20:50. > :20:52.right to raise the risk of migration. In the end, the only way

:20:53. > :20:59.to solve the crisis is a political solution in Syria. I think he's

:21:00. > :21:03.right to say how important it is to discuss all of these issues with

:21:04. > :21:06.members of the Muslim community. I have set up a new engagement Forum

:21:07. > :21:15.and I will look very closely the specific idea he puts. I support and

:21:16. > :21:19.Isil - first strategy, but can he explain how we're going to succeed

:21:20. > :21:24.with that strategy if it is not shared by Turkey, which seems to be

:21:25. > :21:33.more interested in bombing the Kurdish than bombing Isil? It is

:21:34. > :21:38.right to have a strategy that is Isil-1st. What we're seeing the

:21:39. > :21:41.mothers involved in the process is a growing understanding that the true

:21:42. > :21:48.enemy is Isil. I think if you look at what happened with the hideous

:21:49. > :21:53.bombing in Turkey, which has now been firmly laid at the dawn of

:21:54. > :21:56.Isil, you do see a growing understanding from Turkish leaders

:21:57. > :22:04.that Isil is an enormous threat to their country. It might have been

:22:05. > :22:12.helpful if you'd said more about how robust the intelligence is to

:22:13. > :22:19.support the fact he's put forward, particularly the 70,000 Syrian

:22:20. > :22:24.fighters. The matter of ground forces, I think that's where the key

:22:25. > :22:28.weakness is. Could he say what efforts he's continuing to make to

:22:29. > :22:47.persuade Iraqi government to do more to support the Sunnia, because they

:22:48. > :22:56.will be crucial in defeating Isil. We need more progress on hiring

:22:57. > :23:00.Sunnis and Kurdish people into the Syrian troops, so there are trips

:23:01. > :23:07.who will be trusted by local people when they clear and hold territory

:23:08. > :23:12.held by Sunni tribes. We are doing this already, we have people

:23:13. > :23:18.training, at their request to us. I'm sure they'd like us to do more.

:23:19. > :23:22.We'll keep on looking at the requests. On the robustness of the

:23:23. > :23:28.intelligence case about the ground forces, this is all clear through

:23:29. > :23:35.the authorities in a way that didn't exist before the Iraq war. If the

:23:36. > :23:38.house wants to invite some of these senior officials to give detailed

:23:39. > :23:45.evidence, I'm very happy for that to happen. In no way do I want to be

:23:46. > :23:49.accused of inventing intelligence information or overstating it, I'm

:23:50. > :23:52.trying to understate everything. The only thing am absolutely clear about

:23:53. > :23:58.is the face of threat and we should deal with that. The Prime Minister

:23:59. > :24:03.has made a compelling, considered case today. As somebody who voted

:24:04. > :24:08.against action last time this came to the house, I'd like to say I will

:24:09. > :24:12.be joining them in standing not only with our allies but with the

:24:13. > :24:17.countless thousands of Muslims who have been enslaved, massacred and

:24:18. > :24:21.tortured across the region. I have just one question for him and that

:24:22. > :24:26.is, that he tell us what the assurance he can give to our forces

:24:27. > :24:34.were supporting Kurdish forces on the ground that they would be bombed

:24:35. > :24:37.by Russia? This is a different question that the house is

:24:38. > :24:41.considering and I do want to go back over past ground, this is a new

:24:42. > :24:46.question and I would appeal to colleagues right across the house to

:24:47. > :24:49.respond in the way she has done. In terms of the moderate forces, this

:24:50. > :24:55.is the remaining disagreement between us and Russia. Russia so far

:24:56. > :25:00.has done more to inflict damage on moderate forces than on Isil. There

:25:01. > :25:03.is some sign of that changing and we need to encourage that to change

:25:04. > :25:09.more. Not least because, in the process we have had passed, the

:25:10. > :25:19.Russians have accepted that people like the From The Syrian Army and

:25:20. > :25:23.the representatives should be a part in Syria. As a member of the Foreign

:25:24. > :25:26.Affairs Committee, and like to thank the Prime Minister for coming to the

:25:27. > :25:31.house today to deal with some of the issues raised in a report on how we

:25:32. > :25:37.can best ring and end to Isil. This house has been asked to commit to

:25:38. > :25:42.military action in the past, and that has ended badly. I do believe

:25:43. > :25:46.he has yet answered our questions adequately on issues like growing

:25:47. > :25:56.trips or a long-term strategy. Further to the comments from the

:25:57. > :26:03.chairman, will he give evidence before this house approves military

:26:04. > :26:06.action. And happy did appear before the committee, I can't do that

:26:07. > :26:10.before a vote in this house, but were there to be a vote in this

:26:11. > :26:15.house, I would appear in this hat is at this dispatch box for a

:26:16. > :26:21.full-day's debate, and I will sit and listen to contributions, I will

:26:22. > :26:25.take questions, I will take as many interventions as I possibly can. I

:26:26. > :26:30.would say, the select committee did as good questions and I would urge

:26:31. > :26:35.him to read our response in full. The chairman has indicated that the

:26:36. > :26:40.answers are satisfactory, and I would ask him as a member of that

:26:41. > :26:44.respect it's committee to look carefully, and if there are other

:26:45. > :26:49.point he was to raise, I am happy to enter correspondence with him. The

:26:50. > :26:57.Prime Minister will know that some of the regional tensions in the

:26:58. > :27:03.Middle East and in Syria, stem from mutual hostility and antagonism

:27:04. > :27:09.between Iran and Saudi Arabia. During our committee visit to those

:27:10. > :27:15.countries, we were given assurances that both countries are prepared to

:27:16. > :27:18.start constructive dialogue. Would he good offices at the United

:27:19. > :27:25.Nations to bring these countries together to try to make sure that

:27:26. > :27:29.their hostility stops going forward. I think he's absolutely right, that

:27:30. > :27:35.dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Iran is going to be crucial to

:27:36. > :27:39.providing the backdrop to a political solution in Syria. We need

:27:40. > :27:52.to make sure that the potential conflict between Sunni majority

:27:53. > :27:56.nations take step to identify the common NMI, which is this Islamist

:27:57. > :28:00.extremism, most notably through Isil, which is a threat to us and a

:28:01. > :28:07.massive threat to the stability of the region. It is important that the

:28:08. > :28:11.Prime Minister provides a really assurances that many of my

:28:12. > :28:16.colleagues are seeking, particularly in terms of reconstruction after

:28:17. > :28:22.conflict, but isn't it a pivotal moment at the United Nations

:28:23. > :28:27.security council resolution, and he confirmed that it doesn't just

:28:28. > :28:31.permit all necessary steps to be taken to eradicate Isil? It doesn't

:28:32. > :28:37.just allow all messes as a steps, but it actually calls upon member

:28:38. > :28:42.states to take all necessary steps. And what would it say about our

:28:43. > :28:47.judgment if we fail to take heed of the appeal from the United Nations?

:28:48. > :28:51.I think he makes a very powerful point. On the resolution, it

:28:52. > :28:56.confirms the right of member states to defend themselves and others and

:28:57. > :29:00.it confirms the need to do so against Isil. I think it is a very

:29:01. > :29:05.powerful point. When people talk about knee jerk reactions, we need

:29:06. > :29:10.to think about what is changed. What has changed is we do have a UN

:29:11. > :29:17.security council resolution, Paris this happens, the advice for action

:29:18. > :29:21.is so clear. Members will be thinking carefully about this and

:29:22. > :29:27.rightly so, but looking at the party conference motion last year, the

:29:28. > :29:32.first point about opposing action until the following conditions were

:29:33. > :29:36.met, the first point was clear and unambiguous, authorisation from the

:29:37. > :29:40.United Nations. That is a very important step forward, so members

:29:41. > :29:46.who feel this is the right step should see that as a very important

:29:47. > :29:51.point. I thank the Prime Minister for the great care he has taken to

:29:52. > :29:54.convincing case today, but he and I convincing case today, but he and I

:29:55. > :29:57.sat in this chamber when a very convincing case was made for the

:29:58. > :30:02.Iraq war, so we need to be very careful about this. He may want --

:30:03. > :30:07.he may not want to speak in public about it, but many of us will meet

:30:08. > :30:17.to be convinced about the operational bases for this. I think

:30:18. > :30:25.the weakest part of his argument was his response about this ragbag army

:30:26. > :30:29.of Syrians, but they wouldn't take territory from Isil. He would want

:30:30. > :30:36.to see it, but we have to cooperate with Russia and Assad if we want to

:30:37. > :30:45.solve this and go on with reconstruction.

:30:46. > :30:53.I would say to him we should not let that, we have two examine the case

:30:54. > :30:58.in front of us know, from what you will feel they were told in 2003.

:30:59. > :31:03.The point he makes about one of the most difficult arguments is the

:31:04. > :31:07.issue of ground troops. He is right. It is probably the most difficult

:31:08. > :31:12.argument. I am not denying that, I am not attending there is some

:31:13. > :31:19.perfect Armed Forces ready for us to work with. I am saying do not

:31:20. > :31:27.underestimate the fact that there are Free Syrian Army forces and

:31:28. > :31:30.Kurdish forces that can help. I am not overplaying them, they do exist.

:31:31. > :31:32.They are doing good work and we can help them. I have said specifically,

:31:33. > :31:33.the real arrival of ground troops we need will follow from a political

:31:34. > :31:37.transition and a new government in Syria. The only difference between

:31:38. > :31:49.us and the tween myself and the honourable member is whether or not

:31:50. > :31:57.we could actually team up with Assad. I do not think that is

:31:58. > :32:01.practical or doable. I hope we do not have to let this difference

:32:02. > :32:05.between us mean we have to end up in different lobbies. We understand

:32:06. > :32:12.asthma as we can act -- inasmuch as asthma as we can act -- inasmuch as

:32:13. > :32:17.we can act now to reduce the threat, we can act now to reduce the threat,

:32:18. > :32:23.we should. That I have understood him correctly, he thinks that UK's

:32:24. > :32:27.participation in existing military action in Syria would fulfil two

:32:28. > :32:30.functions. First of all by distraught and Isil communications

:32:31. > :32:36.to help guard against terrorist threats here, and secondly to buy

:32:37. > :32:43.time for forces on the ground in Syria to push Isil, Daesh back, even

:32:44. > :32:48.pending a political settlement in the country. On that second point,

:32:49. > :32:53.judgment that if that is achieved in judgment that if that is achieved in

:32:54. > :32:57.pushing them back, what are the forces that are most likely to move

:32:58. > :33:06.on to fill the gap in advance of the political settlement that we want to

:33:07. > :33:12.see? He is absolutely right. Let me answer him in a slightly strange

:33:13. > :33:13.way, which is when Russia bombed the Free Syrian Army, the forces that

:33:14. > :33:48.went into that area tended to be went into that area tended to be

:33:49. > :33:50.we take action against Isil, where we take action against Isil,

:33:51. > :33:53.they are moderate forces are Kurdish they are moderate forces are Kurdish

:33:54. > :33:55.act in conjunction with them, they act in conjunction with them, they

:33:56. > :33:56.can take all on the Minister territory. We should not overstate

:33:57. > :34:10.what their abilities are, and we what their abilities are, and we

:34:11. > :34:10.have to wait for a transition in have to wait for a transition in

:34:11. > :34:11.Syria to have the full answer, but the question is can we make progress

:34:12. > :34:12.now? My answer is yes. Can I thank him for his comprehensive statement

:34:13. > :34:12.this morning? Could I caution him this morning? Could I caution him

:34:13. > :34:13.ground troops? God forbid further ground troops? God forbid further

:34:14. > :34:14.major attacks on the West could, I say could, forced the Western forces

:34:15. > :34:18.to deploy and prevent further atrocities on our sheets. I have

:34:19. > :34:23.great respect for him and his great respect for him and

:34:24. > :34:26.knowledge of military issues, but we knowledge of military issues, but we

:34:27. > :34:28.do have to think here about the danger of being counter-productive,

:34:29. > :34:33.and I think there is good evidence from history that the presence of

:34:34. > :34:39.Western ground troops could be radicalising. That is why we are on

:34:40. > :34:42.a careful path of saying we support action from the air and the troops

:34:43. > :34:47.application of British ground application of British ground

:34:48. > :34:49.troops. I am keen to accommodate the interest of colleagues, which is

:34:50. > :34:55.that regard by brevity to be that regard by brevity to be

:34:56. > :35:05.lawyer, Emily Thornberry. I wanted lawyer, Emily Thornberry. I wanted

:35:06. > :35:10.was today. I am very disappointed. I was today. I am very disappointed. I

:35:11. > :35:15.have many questions but I will ask just one. That is about the military

:35:16. > :35:19.strategy. I know the Prime Minister agrees that we cannot bomb Syria

:35:20. > :35:24.into a Western-style democracy from 30,000 feet. I want to focus on

:35:25. > :35:32.ground troops. These ground troops he speaks about, the 70,000 moderate

:35:33. > :35:37.Sunnis seem to be in the wrong place. There is a question about

:35:38. > :35:43.whether they exist, but the most important question I want to ask the

:35:44. > :35:47.Prime Minister is this. Given that the Russians are supposed to be some

:35:48. > :35:53.form of Ally to us, in relation to this I imagine we will have

:35:54. > :35:56.co-ordinated action with them, the Russians continue to bomb the

:35:57. > :36:02.moderate Sunnis, so there will be chaos on the ground. As I

:36:03. > :36:08.explained, the military strategy is to take out the terrorist targets we

:36:09. > :36:16.can, that will help to degrade and dismantle Isil in Syria, to deflate

:36:17. > :36:18.and destroy the caliphate which is a radicalising force around the world.

:36:19. > :36:23.We do not agree and agreed a guard with the Russians for the reasons I

:36:24. > :36:29.have given. We want them to focus on Isil, not on the Free Syrian Army.

:36:30. > :36:32.That is their discussion we need to have with them. The gap between us

:36:33. > :36:41.is getting narrower. I am prepared is getting narrower. I am prepared

:36:42. > :36:45.to support the Prime Minister and military action against Islamic

:36:46. > :36:49.State, who poses a severe than direct threat, but not against

:36:50. > :36:55.Assad, who does not. I want Isil only strategy. Can he confirm that

:36:56. > :36:59.the motion he will bring forward will be very tightly defined, which

:37:00. > :37:02.will be military action against Islamic State only, and will not

:37:03. > :37:09.give him any room to go ahead under attack Assad on the back of this

:37:10. > :37:15.motion? I can rarely give him full satisfaction, but on this I can. I

:37:16. > :37:24.guarantee that if we have the resolution, it will say exactly

:37:25. > :37:25.that. He has made a strong and compelling case particularly on the

:37:26. > :37:30.grounds of national security for action, and I welcome the

:37:31. > :37:36.comprehensive nature of the debate. But my concern relates to the fact

:37:37. > :37:41.that the Prime Minister spoke about a Isil first plan, rather than Syria

:37:42. > :37:44.first. There is evidence that Assad's barbarity is unhelpful,

:37:45. > :37:50.forcing moderate Syrians towards extremism. I feel the UK has not

:37:51. > :37:55.priority it demanded. What the priority it demanded. What the

:37:56. > :38:00.assurance can you give the House that a tactical focus on air strikes

:38:01. > :38:08.will not distract or undermine those vital attempt to achieve a ceasefire

:38:09. > :38:11.and political transition? I think she puts it well, and the guarantee

:38:12. > :38:15.I can give is that we are stepping up our diplomatic and political

:38:16. > :38:18.efforts, and you can see that through the work of the Foreign

:38:19. > :38:23.Secretary on the work I am doing on this issue. I can guarantee that

:38:24. > :38:29.this is a serious strategy because in the end there is no defeat of

:38:30. > :38:30.Isil until in the end there is a Syrian Government that can represent

:38:31. > :38:34.all of its people. These Islamist all of its people. These Islamist

:38:35. > :38:39.extremist groups, wherever they are in the world, whether in Somalia or

:38:40. > :38:44.Nigeria, or Libya, they take Nigeria, or Libya, they take

:38:45. > :38:47.advantage of ungoverned space of corrupt governments, of feel failure

:38:48. > :38:52.for countries to look after their people. This is a serious strategy

:38:53. > :39:00.but we have to recognise there will be no Syria unless we can do great

:39:01. > :39:04.and destroy Isil. Can I thank the Prime Minister for his considered

:39:05. > :39:11.statement and approach to the issue today. I think it is important

:39:12. > :39:16.following the atrocities in Paris that we stand shoulder to shoulder

:39:17. > :39:21.with France. And I will be supporting any motion he brings

:39:22. > :39:29.forward to take action against Isil in Syria. Will he be talking to his

:39:30. > :39:33.counterparts in other European Union countries to ensure that they also

:39:34. > :39:39.play their part in defeating them? Can I thank him for his support. I

:39:40. > :39:43.can confirm I will be having these conversations. President Hollande is

:39:44. > :39:46.coming to the Commonwealth heads of government conference to talk about

:39:47. > :39:49.climate change on Friday, and I will report to him directly on the

:39:50. > :39:54.feeling in this House of Commons about the need to stand shoulder to

:39:55. > :40:00.shoulder with our French allies and colleagues. We also have an EU

:40:01. > :40:06.conference on EU relations with Turkey, and I will be able to have

:40:07. > :40:07.and prime ministers about the and prime ministers about the

:40:08. > :40:22.discussions we have had here, and the mood of the House of Commons and

:40:23. > :40:25.what needs to be done. With the what needs to be done. With the

:40:26. > :40:25.agree that whatever important agree that whatever

:40:26. > :40:25.differences we have that there is a differences we have that there is a

:40:26. > :40:27.united message from across the House united message from across the House

:40:28. > :40:32.about its up audience of Islamic about its up audience of Islamic

:40:33. > :40:35.State and its work, and we wish to eliminate it from our society? Would

:40:36. > :40:38.he also agree that we must learn the lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan

:40:39. > :40:41.and Libya and not to go when on a tactic and make up the strategy as

:40:42. > :40:45.you go along, and that fundamentally you go along, and that fundamentally

:40:46. > :40:48.would he consider again addressing would he consider again addressing

:40:49. > :40:53.even more fully that doing the things Islamic State want us not to

:40:54. > :40:58.do, to build an international Coalition, including Assad, Turkey,

:40:59. > :41:03.Russia and above all to build an Islamic Coalition in the region so

:41:04. > :41:06.that those people on the ground in the region can carry the whole of

:41:07. > :41:10.global moderate Islamic opinion with global moderate Islamic opinion with

:41:11. > :41:16.them and isolate Islamic State from them and isolate Islamic State from

:41:17. > :41:21.there support? He is absolutely right that we need to show unity in

:41:22. > :41:25.what we say about Isil, and that is clear across the House. We also need

:41:26. > :41:34.to make sure that the Coalition to cancer -- counter them... You cannot

:41:35. > :41:40.include Assad in that Coalition include Assad in that Coalition

:41:41. > :41:47.recruiting sergeants to Isil because recruiting sergeants to Isil because

:41:48. > :41:48.of the barrel bombs and attacks on his own people, but let me be clear,

:41:49. > :41:52.this military action, where are we this military action, where are we

:41:53. > :42:10.not the regime. I welcome the not the regime. I welcome the

:42:11. > :42:14.opportunity to stand shoulder to shoulder with our two closest

:42:15. > :42:20.military allies, France and the USA. But does he agree that we need to

:42:21. > :42:25.protect our way of life for future generations, and also the Syrian

:42:26. > :42:28.refugees that want to return home? She makes a very good point. What

:42:29. > :42:34.lies behind this action is not just protection of ourselves, but

:42:35. > :42:38.building a Syria to which people can return, that is what they want. I

:42:39. > :42:41.commend the Prime Minister for the commend the Prime Minister for the

:42:42. > :42:46.way he has brought this to the House. But the failure to date of

:42:47. > :42:50.the Allied operation to defeat Daesh is not because of a lack of air

:42:51. > :42:59.power are bombs we could provide, it is a lack of ground forces able to

:43:00. > :43:06.capitalise. The Free Syrian Army are not even focused on the task of --

:43:07. > :43:11.only focused on defeating Daesh, the also focused on defeating Assad's

:43:12. > :43:19.regime. Does he agree the strategy is one of hope, not of confidence? I

:43:20. > :43:23.am grateful about what he says about the way I am presenting the case.

:43:24. > :43:28.Syria is very far from perfection. Even in Iraq, where we have ground

:43:29. > :43:31.troops of the Iraqi security forces and the Peshmerga, it is a far from

:43:32. > :43:44.ideal situation, as members have said. We need to see more Sunnis

:43:45. > :43:49.engaged in ground forces, but if you conclude from that that we should do

:43:50. > :43:58.nothing, I believe that is despair. We should be taking this action,

:43:59. > :44:01.building on the resources we have. Isil poses a direct threat to the

:44:02. > :44:06.security of this country, and the country should therefore play its

:44:07. > :44:13.part in helping to defeat it. To the tell us about the position of

:44:14. > :44:17.defeating Iran, which is one of the principal sponsors of the Assad

:44:18. > :44:25.regime, and which has many thousands of troops on the ground in Syria? He

:44:26. > :44:30.makes an important point, Iran plays an important role in Syria, but we

:44:31. > :44:34.have many differences with Iran and its policies and its approach, and

:44:35. > :44:38.as the first British Prime Minister to meet an Iranian President for

:44:39. > :44:46.many years, I have always been clear about those differences. But we can

:44:47. > :44:47.agree that the importance of Iran -- agree on the importance of Iran

:44:48. > :44:51.taking part in this. We need the taking part in this. We need the

:44:52. > :44:55.regional players to buy into the future of Syria.

:44:56. > :45:04.It is of course critical that we learn lessons from the past, but

:45:05. > :45:08.it's also critical that we escape the trap that sees Isil and its

:45:09. > :45:13.affiliate has always been a reaction to what we do. They are not

:45:14. > :45:18.children, they are adults, fully and entirely responsible for what they

:45:19. > :45:22.do. If we take the decision he's going to put before us, it will not

:45:23. > :45:29.just extend our involvement, it will extend our responsibility. What more

:45:30. > :45:33.can he say to convince the house and indeed the country of his and his

:45:34. > :45:37.government's staying power on the diplomatic and political front,

:45:38. > :45:41.particularly at a time when big questions are being asked about

:45:42. > :45:48.Britain's ruled the world and how we see our place in the world? I have

:45:49. > :45:53.said before, I think he speaks with great clarity about this issue,

:45:54. > :45:56.about Isil, about the threat they pose and about their own

:45:57. > :46:02.responsibility for their actions. In terms of what written can bring in

:46:03. > :46:05.terms of statecraft and resources, you have seen the decision we have

:46:06. > :46:10.taken about the Foreign Office and aid budget, I think we do have an

:46:11. > :46:15.ability to bring countries together, to play a big role in what is needed

:46:16. > :46:19.diplomatically and also to be able to have a large wallet at the end of

:46:20. > :46:28.this process, not just to look after refugees, but to help rebuild this

:46:29. > :46:33.country once the war is over. The Right Honourable member spoke

:46:34. > :46:41.exactly when he said that Isil are responsible for their actions. Could

:46:42. > :46:47.he make some comments on the fact that these attacks are not an add on

:46:48. > :46:51.to their strategy, it is a quarter part of their philosophy, which is a

:46:52. > :46:56.vile, Satanic death cult and it must be stopped. He has considerable

:46:57. > :47:01.military experience and understanding of these issues and it

:47:02. > :47:05.is a core part of the Isil strategy, not simply to build a so-called

:47:06. > :47:14.caliphate across Iraq and Syria, but the plan external attacks from the

:47:15. > :47:25.caliphate, as we have seen in Beirut and Paris. It is a core part of what

:47:26. > :47:32.they do. I'm glad that he agrees we won't win unless there are more

:47:33. > :47:37.moderate Sunnis involved in forming the government in waiting. What

:47:38. > :47:46.assurances can he give is that there are moderate Sunni leaders, because

:47:47. > :47:51.the truth is the Iraqi security forces and the three Syrian army

:47:52. > :47:54.will find it difficult to take the cities. If those political leaders

:47:55. > :48:12.are there, can he tell us who they are? Firstly, he is absolutely right

:48:13. > :48:18.to say we need those forces. We have rolled back a large extent of the

:48:19. > :48:23.so-called caliphate in Iraq. In terms of the moderate Syrian forces,

:48:24. > :48:27.they will suffer further attrition unless we support them. There are

:48:28. > :48:32.70,000 now, there will be more if we didn't street are support for them

:48:33. > :48:39.financially, as we do already and with equipment as we do already,

:48:40. > :48:43.frankly, by taking the fight to Isil, who are an enormous threat to

:48:44. > :48:49.them. This is partly within our powers. In terms of the people who

:48:50. > :48:53.read these organisations, where it's the Kurdish authorities or the Free

:48:54. > :48:56.Syrian Army, all of whom we are working with, if the argument is

:48:57. > :49:00.being made that there aren't enough of them, yes, I agree. But I don't

:49:01. > :49:05.think that's an argument for in action, I think it's an argument for

:49:06. > :49:10.action and building them up. The only apparent source of wealth that

:49:11. > :49:16.Isil has come some onshore oilfields, which we could, with

:49:17. > :49:23.precision bombing, take out. But we have made little progress on this.

:49:24. > :49:28.Will we be able to do this going forward? It's a very good point. A

:49:29. > :49:32.lot of these fields are in Syria and when we asked the question, what

:49:33. > :49:36.more can we do to cut off the source of funds to Isil, it would be

:49:37. > :49:43.enormously helpful if we could take the action in Syria that I'm talking

:49:44. > :49:46.about. While there are some who will set a myriad of preconditions that

:49:47. > :49:52.we realistically know cannot be met in the timescale given, there are

:49:53. > :49:57.nevertheless very legitimate questions. Can I return him to the

:49:58. > :50:01.issue will he have the courage to say that while the government is far

:50:02. > :50:05.from being a great improvement on its predecessor, actually, their

:50:06. > :50:10.political settlement in Iraq is broken, and only long-term solution

:50:11. > :50:15.to this will lead the international community to recognise that good a

:50:16. > :50:18.great emphasis on rebuilding the capacity by the Sunni areas in

:50:19. > :50:25.particular in that country to be able to build up the capacity to

:50:26. > :50:29.govern for themselves will stop he is right, the situation and

:50:30. > :50:35.government in Iraq is fragile, it needs a lot of extra work. It is an

:50:36. > :50:38.improvement on what came before. But again, I would make the argument

:50:39. > :50:44.that it is buying gauging that we are unable to bring about this

:50:45. > :50:49.change. I think this debate is revealing that there are answers to

:50:50. > :50:52.all these questions, one can raise the issue about whether the

:50:53. > :50:57.comprehensive enough, but there is no perfection when it comes to this.

:50:58. > :51:01.In the end, we can ask all the questions and we can try and answer

:51:02. > :51:07.all the questions and only get to a point of decision. In my, with what

:51:08. > :51:11.is emerging from this discussion, there are answers, but we can't

:51:12. > :51:18.dodge a decision. In relation to defeating this evil organisation's

:51:19. > :51:38.ideology and appeal and self proclaimed legitimacy, France and

:51:39. > :51:43.other countries use the term Daesh, and I think it would help stem the

:51:44. > :51:49.rise of Islam phobia by stopping the link with Islam and this

:51:50. > :51:57.organisation. They have chosen to call themselves Islamic State for a

:51:58. > :52:03.reason, and we shouldn't do that. My only concern is whether we might

:52:04. > :52:06.lose the public by changing the name, but I am listening very

:52:07. > :52:13.carefully to the arguments he is making. I thank the Prime Minister

:52:14. > :52:22.further patients he has shown this morning. Can I pressed him on one

:52:23. > :52:26.point. He topped very rightly about combating Isil Daesh. Can he use the

:52:27. > :52:33.word separate comfort people in this country, that the government is not

:52:34. > :52:38.about regime change in Serbia? I'm very happy to say that. We are not

:52:39. > :52:44.proposing to take military action to achieve regime change in Syria, that

:52:45. > :52:51.is not the agenda. The agenda is to help others, including our allies,

:52:52. > :52:55.to degrade and deflate and ultimately destroyed Isil. We do

:52:56. > :53:00.believe, as everyone believes in the process that the need to be

:53:01. > :53:08.political transition in Syria. That is not just our view, it is the view

:53:09. > :53:14.of our allies. Whatever one's view about Assad, overtime, there needs

:53:15. > :53:19.to be a comprehensive and clueless stick government in Syria that can

:53:20. > :53:23.represent all those people. The Prime Minister is absolutely right

:53:24. > :53:28.to say that Daesh needs to be taken on in its physical territory in

:53:29. > :53:33.northern Iraq and Syria, but would he agree with me that this is not

:53:34. > :53:37.just a physical battlefield, this is a battlefield that is taking place

:53:38. > :53:48.in cyberspace as well and we need to make sure that we take on Isil/Daesh

:53:49. > :53:53.wherever they are. He is right, they have put a lot of use to social

:53:54. > :53:58.media and the Internet and the conflict is to take place there as

:53:59. > :54:02.well. One of the challenges we will face out the increasing number of

:54:03. > :54:05.refugees in spring next year. What steps will we take with our allies

:54:06. > :54:12.to make sure we deal with the threat of terrorism using the cover of the

:54:13. > :54:18.passage of refugees into Europe to strike at European countries,

:54:19. > :54:21.including the United Kingdom. Obviously, at Europol smack external

:54:22. > :54:26.border, we need to do better at making sure refugees are properly

:54:27. > :54:31.fingerprinted and documented, so people can do what they have

:54:32. > :54:36.happened recently with movements across-the-board. Obviously, in

:54:37. > :54:39.Britain, we maintain our own border controls and were able to stop

:54:40. > :54:43.people coming into this country, whether they are European citizens

:54:44. > :54:49.are coming from elsewhere, if we have legitimate security concerns.

:54:50. > :54:54.Thank you. I think the whole house will appreciate the way the Prime

:54:55. > :54:59.Minister is taking this process through Parliament. On Monday, he

:55:00. > :55:03.was at the dispatch box and he said in answer to me that he had an open

:55:04. > :55:07.door to the Leader of the Opposition on this issue, and the Leader of the

:55:08. > :55:12.Opposition today has asked seven sensible questions, but hasn't

:55:13. > :55:17.expressed a view on what he might do. Does the Prime Minister think

:55:18. > :55:20.there is room, perhaps before next week, to get the Leader of the

:55:21. > :55:27.Opposition in and agree a draft motion with him? My door is open to

:55:28. > :55:31.the Leader of the Opposition. He and his team had a briefing from my

:55:32. > :55:36.national security adviser last night and asked a series of questions and

:55:37. > :55:41.got some comprehensive answers. Obviously, if we decide to go ahead

:55:42. > :55:45.with a boat, because that is a sign of significant support across the

:55:46. > :55:50.house, I will try to draft the broadest possible motion that will

:55:51. > :55:53.attract the widest possible support. If people have suggestions for

:55:54. > :55:58.things they want to see a map motion, I am very happy to hear from

:55:59. > :56:02.them. To bring him back to the direct threat to our own

:56:03. > :56:08.constituencies, he will be aware of members of my constituency who were

:56:09. > :56:14.groomed and trained to go and fight for a Isil/Daesh. And he says more

:56:15. > :56:19.about the necessity of going after Isil/Daesh in their territory they

:56:20. > :56:25.control and the impact on actions here. I think he makes a very

:56:26. > :56:31.important point and that's why are military objectives are not humbly

:56:32. > :56:37.about the training camps and the rest. While this so-called caliphate

:56:38. > :56:42.exists and is able to broadcast its poison and its message, it is,

:56:43. > :56:47.shockingly, attracting people from right across the world. It doesn't

:56:48. > :56:51.matter which leader I speak to, I was having talks with the Prime

:56:52. > :56:56.Minister of Canada last night, I will be seeing heads of government

:56:57. > :57:04.from all over the world, but as long as this so-called caliphate exists,

:57:05. > :57:08.it is attracting young people. I thank the Prime Minister for his

:57:09. > :57:11.considered statement, which I very much support. May I ask for his

:57:12. > :57:19.reassuring us that the fantastic work of the men and women of the RAF

:57:20. > :57:23.over the past year and more in Iraq, including supporting troops on the

:57:24. > :57:29.ground, will not be debited my any action we take? I am grateful for

:57:30. > :57:34.his support. The additional resources, where we to go ahead,

:57:35. > :57:41.would be brought into play. It would be a combination of our Typhoon and

:57:42. > :57:46.Tornado jets, principally, and we want to continue what we're doing in

:57:47. > :57:56.Iraq, but do some more in Syria as well. Can I ask him a question about

:57:57. > :58:02.making sure his strategy is truly comprehensive. On Tuesday, I asked

:58:03. > :58:06.about financial flows to Isil/Daesh, and I want to ask about what

:58:07. > :58:11.consideration he has made about the economic future for Syria. What

:58:12. > :58:19.plans has he made with international partners to make sure the economic

:58:20. > :58:26.future of Syria stable? The truth is that Isil do have possession of some

:58:27. > :58:37.of the parts of city but those oil fields in it, so are able to take

:58:38. > :58:42.that well and sometimes sell it to the Syrian government. By taking

:58:43. > :58:46.action in Syria, we might be able to stop that. As for the future of

:58:47. > :58:51.Syria, it does have natural resources and a great resource of

:58:52. > :58:54.its people, and in transitional form, it would attract great support

:58:55. > :58:58.from the Arab world and the developed world and the West, where

:58:59. > :59:05.would we would want to see a rebuilding of Syria. Although I am

:59:06. > :59:11.keen to accommodate remaining interest, but the replies we have

:59:12. > :59:21.had from the Prime Minister must be matched by single, short,

:59:22. > :59:27.supplementary questions. Can he explain to the house how long

:59:28. > :59:31.this will take to implement? It's an important point. I will report back

:59:32. > :59:36.to the house regularly. I don't want to put a time frame on this, because

:59:37. > :59:42.as what we are doing in Iraq has shown, this is taking time. It is

:59:43. > :59:46.taking time because we have not committed ground troops. This is a

:59:47. > :59:50.strategy of relying on those on the ground. Just because it is a long

:59:51. > :59:56.and complex strategy, doesn't mean it's not right one. There will be

:59:57. > :00:03.Muslims in this country, particularly young Muslims who are

:00:04. > :00:08.concerned about the UK being seen to take military action against other

:00:09. > :00:11.Muslims. Could the Prime Minister address those concerns directly and

:00:12. > :00:12.make it clear that to be against Isil/Daesh is not to be against

:00:13. > :00:26.Muslims? It is absolutely the case. When you

:00:27. > :00:31.see what they have done, throwing people off buildings, subjecting

:00:32. > :00:35.women to sexual slavery, bombs in Ankara and Beirut where Muslim after

:00:36. > :00:39.Muslim has been butchered, those are the arguments that we have to make

:00:40. > :00:43.and our Muslim constituents want to know that we are on the side of

:00:44. > :00:50.Islam, a peaceful religion, and just want to get rid of them. Two years

:00:51. > :00:54.ago I was opposed to intervention in Syria, but the light of the

:00:55. > :00:59.atrocities in Paris and in particular my right honourable

:01:00. > :01:04.friend's statement today, I will support the motion when it comes to

:01:05. > :01:11.this House, but does he agree that Isil-macro represent a clear and

:01:12. > :01:14.present danger to my constituents? I can absolutely confirm that that is

:01:15. > :01:23.our aim, it is about dealing with Isil. I accept that Isil present a

:01:24. > :01:26.clear and present threat to this country, whether or not we are

:01:27. > :01:33.involved in bombing in Iraq or Syria or both. I am convinced of their

:01:34. > :01:36.terrorist intentions at what they are. I am pleased that the Prime

:01:37. > :01:41.Minister has said that the motion he will bring before the House will

:01:42. > :01:45.roll out any mission creep beyond dealing with Isil. Can he go

:01:46. > :01:48.further? The weakness in his argument today is about who will

:01:49. > :01:55.occupy and control that territory if we move Isil into retreat. Can he

:01:56. > :02:02.come back with more detail about that to convince us that the action

:02:03. > :02:06.will result in the outcome we desire? I am happy to do that. What

:02:07. > :02:11.I have tried to set out and be very clear on is that there is not a

:02:12. > :02:15.perfect situation in Syria, of huge amounts of ground forces that can do

:02:16. > :02:19.the job that he mentions. But it would be wrong to suggest that there

:02:20. > :02:26.are not any. The more we can be seen to act, the more we can be seen to

:02:27. > :02:29.build up those forces. Those who would criticise our international

:02:30. > :02:34.aid budget, and there has been criticism in the press today, does

:02:35. > :02:38.my right honourable friend agree that it is important to our national

:02:39. > :02:42.security as well as our moral obligation to the world? That is

:02:43. > :02:45.right and that is why we are going to refashion the budget to make sure

:02:46. > :02:54.that half of it focuses on fragile and conflict bound states. 30% of

:02:55. > :02:58.Isil held land in Iraq has been retained, but 70% remains in their

:02:59. > :03:07.hands. Why is it not right that we in fact help our allies by clearing

:03:08. > :03:13.the problem of Dhaesh in Iraq and build a pluralistic state in Iraq

:03:14. > :03:16.that can have a potential future to be supported and take commitment to

:03:17. > :03:21.Iraq first before moving on to Syria? The honourable lady asks a

:03:22. > :03:25.very good question and there are two answers. I did think it is possible

:03:26. > :03:29.to complete the work in Iraq without dealing with Dhaesh in Syria,

:03:30. > :03:33.because they don't recognise a border and we are recognising it.

:03:34. > :03:37.The second point I would make is that while Isil is a threat to us

:03:38. > :03:46.wherever it is, actually the biggest part of the threat is around Raqqa,

:03:47. > :03:51.in Syria. The people of the Calder Valley will want to know one thing,

:03:52. > :03:55.quite rightly. And that is if British action in Syria will make a

:03:56. > :03:58.real difference to the situation on the ground and make us safer at

:03:59. > :04:03.home. Can my honourable friend confirm that will be the case? I

:04:04. > :04:06.very much believe that on the basis of the military and security advice

:04:07. > :04:10.I have been given that that would be the case and I can see it myself

:04:11. > :04:16.because part of the plot against this country has come not just from

:04:17. > :04:25.Isil but from around Raqqa. I think Syria is the greater threat to us. I

:04:26. > :04:30.must declare an interest because my husband has been a member of the UK

:04:31. > :04:33.Armed Forces. The Prime Minister has stated that the proposed her

:04:34. > :04:37.involvement can be sustained for many months. Can he offer further

:04:38. > :04:42.clarity about how many mothers it can be sustained for or would be

:04:43. > :04:51.required to be sustained for at this stage? -- months. I can't put a

:04:52. > :04:57.timescale on this because it will depend on the amount of success we

:04:58. > :04:59.have in deflating Isil and the so-called caliphate. One of the

:05:00. > :05:05.reasons the allies would like is to take part is because of the strength

:05:06. > :05:09.and stability of the Armed Forces. We are a country that can sustain

:05:10. > :05:13.them at a regular tempo of combat, rather than surging up and down.

:05:14. > :05:16.That makes that makes us a particularly valuable ally in what

:05:17. > :05:22.will undoubtedly be a long and complex campaign. My right

:05:23. > :05:27.honourable friend has made a reasoned and principled case about

:05:28. > :05:31.why we must act in Syria in the same way that we do in a ruck, but

:05:32. > :05:39.previous experience shows that post-conflict renewal is critical.

:05:40. > :05:41.-- in Iraq. Our experience in Sinjar shows that when Isil leave, they

:05:42. > :05:48.leave a humanitarian desert behind them. Can my right honourable friend

:05:49. > :05:52.on firm that planning is already going on in Sinjar so that when Isil

:05:53. > :05:59.is defeated, as it will be, we will be in a position to make sure that

:06:00. > :06:06.renewal occurs and occurs well? That is a very important point. As soon

:06:07. > :06:10.as areas are liberated from Isil, by for instance Iraqi security forces,

:06:11. > :06:17.our budgets can come into play and one that we are ready to assist at

:06:18. > :06:23.once. The sooner we can help, the sooner we can deal with the issue of

:06:24. > :06:25.migration as well. Isil have proved themselves to be brutal and

:06:26. > :06:33.merciless killers but they have recruits from many different places.

:06:34. > :06:37.If we can defeat Isil Daesh militarily, given the nature of the

:06:38. > :06:41.threat and their mindset, does that mean eradicating every single

:06:42. > :06:46.individual man and woman with a connection? And if not, where and

:06:47. > :06:49.how do we plan to detain those left until they no longer pose a

:06:50. > :06:55.terrorist threat to the places that they have come from? The honourable

:06:56. > :06:59.gentleman asks a question which we could spend a whole day debating.

:07:00. > :07:04.What I would say is that military action is only one part of a

:07:05. > :07:07.strategy to deal with this enormous problem of radicalised, extremist

:07:08. > :07:11.Islam and the violence that it brings. You can do a certain amount

:07:12. > :07:16.of military action but you need your counterterrorism powers, you need

:07:17. > :07:20.your preventive strategy, strategies to deal with returning Syrian

:07:21. > :07:23.fighters. You need to do all of these things and it is, as I put

:07:24. > :07:30.it, going to be a generational struggle to put it right. If the

:07:31. > :07:32.decision is taken to extend air strikes into Syria, would my right

:07:33. > :07:38.honourable friend ensure that this House and my constituents that every

:07:39. > :07:41.effort would be made to keep people safe on the streets of Britain

:07:42. > :07:48.especially during the Christmas period when our towns and cities are

:07:49. > :07:52.specially busy? My right honourable friend asks a very important

:07:53. > :07:56.question. This is part of the strategy to keep us safe. We cannot

:07:57. > :08:00.pretend there is no danger to our country now. The level of threat is

:08:01. > :08:04.set to severe which means an attack is highly likely. We are already at

:08:05. > :08:08.that level and the view of security services is that there is a threat

:08:09. > :08:13.from Isil and we are very high up their target list. The Prime

:08:14. > :08:17.Minister rightly said that peace is the process and not an event. Can I

:08:18. > :08:22.seek his assurances that of course it is essential that there should be

:08:23. > :08:30.a diplomatic process in place, but the importance of a political

:08:31. > :08:34.settlement could be made to run in parallel alongside a necessary fact

:08:35. > :08:36.that we undoubtedly face? The honourable gentleman with his own

:08:37. > :08:41.military experience knows about this. He is right, they are parallel

:08:42. > :08:45.processes and I would not be in favour of military action if I

:08:46. > :08:48.thought that in some way it could derail the political process. My

:08:49. > :08:53.view is that it will assist the political process for the clear

:08:54. > :08:58.reasons I have given. Does he agree with me that just as actions have

:08:59. > :09:05.consequences, so does inaction? I am personally familiar with Syria, and

:09:06. > :09:08.I mean for Syria, the region and our country. And focused and

:09:09. > :09:14.proportionate military action in tandem with political effort offers

:09:15. > :09:18.a best hope for a safer future for Syria and the UK. My honourable

:09:19. > :09:22.friend put it very well. It is a conference of strategy but one that

:09:23. > :09:29.recognises that we have to step up to the plate, not just militarily

:09:30. > :09:33.but diplomatically as well. Can I assure the House that all of us

:09:34. > :09:37.share the objective of defeating Isil but there are some critical

:09:38. > :09:40.questions and one that the Prime Minister knows is critical. Air

:09:41. > :09:46.strikes on their own and without forces on the ground can

:09:47. > :09:49.realistically achieve the objective, can they? He points to

:09:50. > :09:55.the troops, and there has been debate about that. Do our allies

:09:56. > :09:58.share the view that these are the appropriate troops to take the

:09:59. > :10:02.ground and whether we can realistically protect them without

:10:03. > :10:06.getting into conflict with Russia and others? Our allies do take the

:10:07. > :10:11.view that these are people that we can and should be working with. The

:10:12. > :10:18.US has played a large role, as we have, in helping to build up and

:10:19. > :10:22.fund these forces. Prime Minister, people are genuinely afraid of the

:10:23. > :10:26.Isil extremist ideology threatening our way of life. Children, even

:10:27. > :10:30.constituents in Taunton Deane, which might seem miles away, but it is

:10:31. > :10:34.not, men and women in the street. We cannot live like this. Can the Prime

:10:35. > :10:39.Minister please confirm that he will push ahead with measures to defeat

:10:40. > :10:44.this ideology? And also that he will include a plan to care for genuine

:10:45. > :10:49.Syrians who may have to flee and eventually return? I can certainly

:10:50. > :10:52.give my right honourable friend the assurance that we will assist

:10:53. > :10:56.Syrians who have had to flee their homes. In the end we have to decide

:10:57. > :11:01.whether to act and confront this evil and in my view if we don't act

:11:02. > :11:07.we will be less safe. In relation to ground troops, the Prime Minister

:11:08. > :11:10.has referred to 70,000 Syrian opposition fighters, principally the

:11:11. > :11:14.Free Syrian Army, who don't belong to extremist groups. The Foreign

:11:15. > :11:18.Affairs Committee heard if you weeks ago that there appeared to be little

:11:19. > :11:22.chance of a functional ally emerging from the chaos on the ground any

:11:23. > :11:28.tell us what has changed? Nothing tell us what has changed? Nothing

:11:29. > :11:32.has changed. We have given regular reports about supporting the Free

:11:33. > :11:35.Syrian Army and what we have done to try and bolster their forces. I have

:11:36. > :11:39.given the House the most accurate set of statistics that I can about

:11:40. > :11:43.their existence but I say to colleagues that we can either help

:11:44. > :11:53.build them up and work with them, or turn away and the then numbers

:11:54. > :11:57.depleted even more. I welcome the clear plan from the Prime Minister

:11:58. > :12:01.but what concerns me a little is the level of collective resolve to

:12:02. > :12:04.deliver a benign and representative Government in Syria. Can the Prime

:12:05. > :12:08.Minister assure me that we will see the strategy through to the end and

:12:09. > :12:13.we will not pull out if the military and diplomatic advice that he is

:12:14. > :12:18.currently receiving proves to be optimistic on timescales? I am

:12:19. > :12:22.grateful for my honourable friend's support. The advice I am getting is

:12:23. > :12:26.not that there is some quick or easy way of solving this problem. Just as

:12:27. > :12:33.we have been committed for four years to humanitarian assistance.

:12:34. > :12:37.Four years, Geneva one, Geneva two, now Vienna, and we have been

:12:38. > :12:40.committed to the diplomatic process for many years, this whole process

:12:41. > :12:47.will take a long time and we should be clear about that. The Prime

:12:48. > :12:52.Minister has stressed that the Isil first strategy cannot extend to

:12:53. > :12:57.intervening as an ally of President Assad, and in a memorandum to the

:12:58. > :13:00.foreign affairs select said that an intervention on those terms, as an

:13:01. > :13:03.ally of ally of President Assad would be run on three grounds, it

:13:04. > :13:09.misunderstands the causes of the problem, it would make matters

:13:10. > :13:14.worse, and he points to his role as one of Isil's biggest recruiting

:13:15. > :13:18.and accept that those valid and accept that those valid

:13:19. > :13:22.considerations against intervention for many of us persuade us against

:13:23. > :13:26.intervention on the terms that he is commending as well? We do not want

:13:27. > :13:31.to be any part of feeding the evil that we want to be defeating. I have

:13:32. > :13:36.great respect for the honourable gentleman. If we don't intervene

:13:37. > :13:40.against Isil, we should not be surprised when it grows and

:13:41. > :13:43.threatens us more. What I say too many of these concerns, of course

:13:44. > :13:47.there are concerns and difficult questions to answer and it is a

:13:48. > :13:50.complex situation. Just because a strategy is propagated and takes a

:13:51. > :13:56.long time does not mean it is not the right strategy and it cannot

:13:57. > :14:01.work. -- complicated and takes a long time. But in order to say it is

:14:02. > :14:04.difficult and I cannot support it, those people will have no problem

:14:05. > :14:09.finding complexity. It is complex. In the end it comes down to simple

:14:10. > :14:14.judgment about what will make us safer or less safe. As my right

:14:15. > :14:18.honourable friend has said, defeating Isil is the battle of our

:14:19. > :14:24.generation. That he agree with me that Isil are not only attacking our

:14:25. > :14:29.allies but also ourselves, attending terrorist attacks in the UK and

:14:30. > :14:35.poisoning the minds of young people with their ideology, then now is the

:14:36. > :15:22.time to step up and take the fight to them?

:15:23. > :15:32.The Prime Minister is on the record as saying that this unique

:15:33. > :15:35.contribution is a... The missile has been used against Daesh since every

:15:36. > :15:43.this year and what assessment has been made of this excess of the air

:15:44. > :15:49.force in diminishing Daesh? What I would say is that the Brimstone

:15:50. > :15:56.missile, a British missile which has been worked on with the RAF and used

:15:57. > :15:58.before, it is one of the most capable and most accurate weapons

:15:59. > :16:03.systems that there is, particularly when in the hands of our highly

:16:04. > :16:07.trained RAF pilots. It is not just me saying this, it is the view of

:16:08. > :16:09.our military and also our allies, who are so keen to task us to do

:16:10. > :16:18.this. I voted against action last time but

:16:19. > :16:22.it is increasingly likely I will support action as long as it is

:16:23. > :16:27.against Isil are not ground troops. Yesterday, he met the new Prime

:16:28. > :16:38.Minister from Canada who won an election on the basis of pulling out

:16:39. > :16:52.air strikes, nine and great and I hope ring that conclusion stop

:16:53. > :16:58.aptly, or both of two ring. It is the wrong word, it is never ending

:16:59. > :17:03.in. I had good full with him last night and he made a decision about

:17:04. > :17:12.Canadian jet that you looking at setting up the training that

:17:13. > :17:16.Canadians give to the forces. How much will the money put aside for

:17:17. > :17:21.construction today compared to the total plan, it given that he spent

:17:22. > :17:26.13 times on Ron Levy 's and he did on construction? The amount we spend

:17:27. > :17:31.on a military campaign will depend on how long it. The amount we spend

:17:32. > :17:36.on reconstruction will depend on how great the needs are but what I will

:17:37. > :17:42.say to him is that we have a UK aid budget which is almost unrivalled

:17:43. > :17:47.anywhere in the world, and we are capable of winning an enormous

:17:48. > :17:55.amount to bear in terms of reconstruction. Like members on all

:17:56. > :17:59.sides, it is with a heavy heart I say that the Prime Minister has made

:18:00. > :18:07.a compelling case and strategy. One of the most compelling points is the

:18:08. > :18:13.use of Britain's surveillance. Saving civilian lives and Muslim

:18:14. > :18:17.lives is at the heart of the motion. I am happy to do that and am

:18:18. > :18:23.grateful for your support. One of the lessons of Iraq was of the

:18:24. > :18:29.rapidity, scale and organisation of the aid and response needs to match

:18:30. > :18:33.that of the intervention in the first place. A positive message from

:18:34. > :18:37.Kosovo where I was an aid worker, if the Prime Minister and International

:18:38. > :18:45.Development Secretary can assure us that this is the case, he can count

:18:46. > :18:50.on my support. I am grateful. My memory of the discussions before

:18:51. > :18:53.Iraq, particularly on humanitarian aid, is that there was a lot of

:18:54. > :19:00.planning for humanitarian aid packages for after the Iraq war but

:19:01. > :19:04.what there wasn't was a proper plan for not destroying the institutions

:19:05. > :19:11.of the Iraqi state, and as a result, the aides did not really touch the

:19:12. > :19:17.sides of the crisis that we faced. -- aid. This time we will do things

:19:18. > :19:22.differently. The Prime Minister stated that some of our allies want

:19:23. > :19:28.to be alongside us because of the unique capabilities we can supply in

:19:29. > :19:32.the region. Can he outlined some of the capabilities of the RAF and

:19:33. > :19:41.Jonny in tribute to their work? -- outline. Certainly I pay tribute. --

:19:42. > :19:48.join me. There is the raptor poured where it is said that a Tornado can

:19:49. > :19:52.hover over the Isle of Wight and read the hands-on Big Ben such as

:19:53. > :19:56.the capability of this high-definition camera, and the

:19:57. > :20:01.Brimstone missile which is proved to be, in test after test, one of the

:20:02. > :20:07.most accurate weapons with the lowest level of civilian casualties,

:20:08. > :20:12.and those two things are important. The Prime Minister spoke of a new

:20:13. > :20:17.Syrian government but can you explain how and when you envisage

:20:18. > :20:22.installing a new government that represents all sides in the

:20:23. > :20:28.aftermath of conjugated Civil War? The emergence of a transition in

:20:29. > :20:32.Syria requires the Vienna process to work and work well but why I have

:20:33. > :20:37.greater confidence is that a few months ago there was no confidence.

:20:38. > :20:39.The Saudis, the Iranians, the Russians and the Americans are

:20:40. > :20:45.sitting around a table together, that is progress. It is clear from

:20:46. > :20:50.recent events that the airspace over Syria is complex, can the Prime

:20:51. > :20:53.Minister assure me that if and when our proposal comes forward for a

:20:54. > :20:57.motion to take air strikes against macro re-that there will be a

:20:58. > :21:06.coordination strategy between the various air forces taking action

:21:07. > :21:15.over Syria? There is a strategy and the REF will be part of that. --

:21:16. > :21:22.against Syria. One of my constituents said last weekend is

:21:23. > :21:28.that it empowers but the rehab, as no doubt that it is not just in

:21:29. > :21:31.major cities in this country that attacks can happen, but in towns and

:21:32. > :21:37.villages as well. There is immense concern. S assume that the House

:21:38. > :21:44.gives support to the Prime Minister in terms of air strikes. Any outline

:21:45. > :21:47.how he and the secretaries of state will update this House? If there is

:21:48. > :21:53.support, there needs to be consensus afterwards. I am happy to be guided

:21:54. > :21:58.by the House as to what it finds most helpful. Regular updates at the

:21:59. > :22:03.dispatch box will be useful. I'm happy to have discussions with

:22:04. > :22:06.select committees. Perhaps we can put something into the motion should

:22:07. > :22:14.it come forward that it guarantees regular updates. We have heard

:22:15. > :22:19.shopping reports from the United Nations of the crimes against

:22:20. > :22:24.humanity perpetrated by Isil against the civilian population in Syria,

:22:25. > :22:29.including the beheading of a female dentist for the crime of treating

:22:30. > :22:33.patients from both sexes. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that at

:22:34. > :22:36.this moment in time, the only practical way we can hold to account

:22:37. > :22:41.the leadership of Isil or these crimes against humanity is through

:22:42. > :22:46.the type of military action he's proposing? I think you are right,

:22:47. > :22:52.you speak clearly about the issue and we should document the many

:22:53. > :22:59.crimes against Muslims in Syria and Iraq carried out by this brutal

:23:00. > :23:04.organisation. We cannot look back to Iraq, we don't look back, we don't

:23:05. > :23:08.hear anything but will you concede that the Chilcot Inquiry produced a

:23:09. > :23:17.report where we are better informed of this complex situation? Firstly,

:23:18. > :23:22.it if we had had are well, it would have been published by now. I am not

:23:23. > :23:27.looking back and saying we should not learn, we should. Let's learn

:23:28. > :23:30.about the importance of clear process, legal advice and the

:23:31. > :23:35.intelligence committee, and we have heard that today. We should not go

:23:36. > :23:40.back to what happened in Iraq and therefore enter F3 is where we are

:23:41. > :23:53.incapable of making decisions necessary to keep our country safe

:23:54. > :23:55.in the future. -- enter a freeze. Daesh is obviously a threat but why

:23:56. > :24:07.do we believe the Russians, President Assad and run would step

:24:08. > :24:11.back from backing Assad 's? I think this is the conversation we have had

:24:12. > :24:16.with the Russians. They have, up to now, said that on no account should

:24:17. > :24:22.President Assad go, and we have said obviously that we wanted to go. The

:24:23. > :24:25.gap between us has narrowed because everybody accepts that there needs

:24:26. > :24:31.to be a transition, and as I have said, I have a strong view about

:24:32. > :24:35.President Assad, I keep saying, it is not a political preference but

:24:36. > :24:38.the statement of fact. I don't think this man is capable of leading a

:24:39. > :24:42.united Syria, that is the view of the Syrian people. A growing

:24:43. > :24:48.understanding of that is one of the things driving forward the Vienna

:24:49. > :24:55.process. Does the Prime Minister agree with his former Foreign

:24:56. > :24:58.Secretary William Hague but ultimately the world will have to

:24:59. > :25:07.redraw the map and create a Sony state in northern Iraq and Syria,

:25:08. > :25:13.and does that make the resolution harder? We should try and respect

:25:14. > :25:17.the territorial integrity of these countries. There are many countries

:25:18. > :25:22.that managed to hold together despite having ethnic and religious

:25:23. > :25:29.differences within them, and it is with despair that I believe you have

:25:30. > :25:37.to have separate parts, we should try and bring them together. Can I

:25:38. > :25:40.offer my right honourable friend my complete support for the approach he

:25:41. > :25:44.is taking. While I hear what he says about the use of British ground

:25:45. > :25:50.troops, in complex the situation can change rapidly. If it is in our

:25:51. > :25:53.military interest to deploy a limited number of ground troops, can

:25:54. > :25:58.you confirm whether he would do that and will he be required to come back

:25:59. > :26:01.to the House to gain our approval? I have said what I have said about

:26:02. > :26:06.ground troops and I will not propose that. The motion needs to set out

:26:07. > :26:13.clearly what it is I am seeking the house's mission to do. I want that

:26:14. > :26:15.to be clear and constrained and I do not want people to believe mission

:26:16. > :26:21.creep is taking place, and I'm happy to listen to views about what the

:26:22. > :26:28.motion should have in it. The Prime Minister has described the head of

:26:29. > :26:35.the snake in Raqqa but when you cut the snake, new heads grow, so how

:26:36. > :26:40.can you ensure that the heads does not regrow in other parts of the

:26:41. > :26:45.region such as Tunisia? There is a difference between snakes, which I'm

:26:46. > :26:54.quite familiar, and hydros from myth and legend. Look, it is not my view

:26:55. > :26:58.that Raqqa is the head of the snake, it is! That is where the plot has

:26:59. > :27:05.come from and that is why only acting in Iraq, rather than Syria,

:27:06. > :27:10.is restricting our effectiveness. Like many in the House, I am pleased

:27:11. > :27:18.the focus is on reconstruction post-conflict. Can you tell the

:27:19. > :27:22.House how widely the priority is shared by our allies such as Germany

:27:23. > :27:26.and Arab states? It is widely understood that what must follow

:27:27. > :27:30.from this is a genuine reconstruction of Syria. Millions of

:27:31. > :27:34.people will want to go home, towns and cities will need to be rebuilt,

:27:35. > :27:39.and an enormous amount of investment will need to go in the country, and

:27:40. > :27:43.once the goblet is over, that can begin and it has widespread support

:27:44. > :27:50.across the EU. There is a view that the EU resolution does not provide

:27:51. > :27:53.the unambiguous permission to use military action, and I wondered

:27:54. > :27:55.whether the Prime Minister was able to say something about whether

:27:56. > :28:03.chapter seven of the UN Charter needs to be invoked to actually

:28:04. > :28:07.allow military action? I would say it is very comprehensive and I read

:28:08. > :28:12.out some of the key terms in it, and it was unanimously adopted, and it

:28:13. > :28:15.has that key chapter seven language in it about all necessary measures,

:28:16. > :28:23.even though it is not chapter seven itself. In all these things, one can

:28:24. > :28:27.seek perfection or one can say we have UN backing, political process,

:28:28. > :28:31.allies asking us to act, advice on the intelligence services about the

:28:32. > :28:34.dangers we face, and in the end, with all that, there comes a

:28:35. > :28:42.decision, and that is the decision we need to take. One of the

:28:43. > :28:45.learnings from the war in Iraq, because of the difference of view,

:28:46. > :28:49.it aggravated separation between British Muslims and the rest of the

:28:50. > :28:53.British population and gave raised to an irrational fear of people

:28:54. > :28:57.because they were Muslim, and led to increasing attacks on people in this

:28:58. > :29:00.country because they are Muslim. Is the prime ministers sure that that

:29:01. > :29:05.will not be the case as a consequence of the decisions he

:29:06. > :29:09.makes after today? I always listen carefully to my honourable friend

:29:10. > :29:13.because he works so hard to represent what is a very multi

:29:14. > :29:19.ethnic, multi-faith constituency in Bedford. My impression is that

:29:20. > :29:24.British Muslims are absolutely clear that Daesh, I saw, this caliphate,

:29:25. > :29:30.is nothing to do with the religion they care about. -- Isil. I went to

:29:31. > :29:35.Friday morning prayers in Chipping Norton recently, under the town

:29:36. > :29:41.hall, where British Muslims gather, and they all said that in Unison.

:29:42. > :29:44.The first thing they said was, these terrible people have nothing to do

:29:45. > :29:49.with us, and you feel their pain in having to say this. I don't feel

:29:50. > :29:59.like we should be but taking action will do damage in that way.

:30:00. > :30:05.Prime Minister, can I ask you to give us your best estimation of the

:30:06. > :30:10.likelihood in a reasonable time of a ceasefire between the major non-

:30:11. > :30:16.Daesh forces that would allow an effective deployment of ground

:30:17. > :30:21.troops to effectively hold Daesh territory. That is a good question

:30:22. > :30:26.and the Vienna process as opposed to deliver that kind of ceasefire

:30:27. > :30:40.between the Free Syrian Army forces and other moderate forces and the

:30:41. > :30:42.Assad regime. That would obviously assist in the destruction of Isil.

:30:43. > :30:45.It would not necessarily instantly add to the number of ground forces.

:30:46. > :30:48.The argument I am making is about taking these steps in parallel. I

:30:49. > :30:52.don't think we can afford to wait before we act and that is the

:30:53. > :30:56.question he will have to ask himself. In order to succeed, I hope

:30:57. > :31:01.the Prime Minister will not leave the House, given the supportive mood

:31:02. > :31:04.that is here, and used his considerable brilliance and

:31:05. > :31:09.resources to draft a crafty motion when what he needs to be doing is

:31:10. > :31:14.informing the coalitions of ground troops that we so badly need. There

:31:15. > :31:22.is no ambition to draft a crafty motion. What I am trying to do is

:31:23. > :31:25.take as much of the House of Commons with me as I can in taking this

:31:26. > :31:29.important and difficult decision. Honourable members on all sides will

:31:30. > :31:33.have concerns that there should not be mission creep and this is about

:31:34. > :31:38.saving Muslim lives in the region as well as British lives at home, that

:31:39. > :31:42.there will be regular reports back to Parliament, that it is part of an

:31:43. > :31:46.overall strategy. All that can be set out in a motion that I hope will

:31:47. > :31:51.achieve the maximum support in this House. Is one of those who voted

:31:52. > :31:57.against the war in the key vote on March the 18th, 2003, I listen to

:31:58. > :32:01.the great words that the Prime Minister used, and he said that our

:32:02. > :32:06.bombing was likely to reduce civilian casualties because of the

:32:07. > :32:10.accuracy of our munitions. Surely that can only happen if our action

:32:11. > :32:14.replaces current less accurate bombing rather than adding to

:32:15. > :32:19.bombing that is taking place. Is that what he meant? Can he outlined

:32:20. > :32:22.that further? That is very much what I meant. I think we should be

:32:23. > :32:32.stepping up what is happening in Syria, but given our accuracy, I

:32:33. > :32:35.would expect that all things being equal, we should take the place in

:32:36. > :32:40.some instances of others, and then the point that he makes is valid. I

:32:41. > :32:45.would like to ask the Prime Minister if each of our allies independently

:32:46. > :32:51.says that others are involved and therefore we don't get involved, how

:32:52. > :32:56.will we ever defeat Isil? That is a very good question which goes to the

:32:57. > :33:00.moral point, is it really a moral stance to say that our allies are

:33:01. > :33:05.taking the action that protects us, so we don't need to act. Without

:33:06. > :33:09.getting too deeply into moral philosophy, if we take the Kantian

:33:10. > :33:14.imperative, we should be following them and not standing away because

:33:15. > :33:17.otherwise nobody would take the action. All colleagues should be

:33:18. > :33:22.familiar with the Kantian imperative and it is helpful to be reminded of

:33:23. > :33:27.that by the Prime Minister. Since I entered the House on 2001 we have

:33:28. > :33:31.been asked on four occasions to support military action. On some of

:33:32. > :33:35.those occasions I voted yes and sometimes no on the merit of the

:33:36. > :33:39.case. Nobody doubts the ability and bravery of the Armed Forces but

:33:40. > :33:43.there are grave doubts about the ground forces in Syria. My question

:33:44. > :33:48.to the Prime Minister is simply this. If increased bombing leads to

:33:49. > :33:53.increased refugees, will the Prime Minister reconsider the figure that

:33:54. > :33:56.he has put on a number of refugees? I am sure the honourable gentleman

:33:57. > :34:00.is right to consider each case on its merits, and I hope he will

:34:01. > :34:03.consider this case very carefully. The decision with respect to Barack

:34:04. > :34:12.has clearly shown benefits and I think the same can happen in Syria.

:34:13. > :34:15.-- with respect to Iraq. We keep our plans under review and listen to the

:34:16. > :34:19.arguments but the most important thing right now, particularly with

:34:20. > :34:23.the difficulties faced by the relocation programmes within the EU,

:34:24. > :34:28.is for us to get on and deliver and that is why I am restating that I am

:34:29. > :34:33.confident there will be 1000 people here by Christmas. Military action

:34:34. > :34:38.in Syria may be a necessary part of stopping Isil but a diplomatic

:34:39. > :34:41.solution is vital. Can the Prime Minister reassure me and my

:34:42. > :34:47.constituents that if military action is taken, he will not take his eye

:34:48. > :34:51.off the ball in relation to a political settlement? I can

:34:52. > :34:55.certainly give that assurance. More philosophy. It is a necessary

:34:56. > :35:03.condition but certainly not a sufficient condition to buy this

:35:04. > :35:14.destroys Isil or build a peaceful Syria that we want to see. -- to

:35:15. > :35:17.either destroy Isil. I think there will be widespread support in this

:35:18. > :35:21.House for the process that was started in Vienna, but I am keen to

:35:22. > :35:26.get clarity on the Government's attitude in the here and now because

:35:27. > :35:29.that will take time. It is majesty's Government view and his

:35:30. > :35:35.advice to this House that a successful ground offensive can take

:35:36. > :35:39.place against Daesh without reference to the Syrian Armed

:35:40. > :35:45.Forces? The answer to that question is that with the ground forces that

:35:46. > :35:48.there are in Syria, with whom we are working, we can have additional

:35:49. > :35:53.impact on Isil through carrying out the air strikes and the air to

:35:54. > :35:59.ground support that we are talking about. That can assist us, otherwise

:36:00. > :36:03.I would not be arguing for it here. Is it perfect? No. Would it be

:36:04. > :36:14.assisted by further ground troops? Yes. But it can make a difference.

:36:15. > :36:18.For any chance of success, it is critical that political ends for the

:36:19. > :36:24.future of Syria are agreed at the outset, which is not the case at the

:36:25. > :36:27.moment. And who is going to coordinate the ground troops and

:36:28. > :36:30.manage that coordination? And what will happen when there are gaps on

:36:31. > :36:37.the ground and how are we going to rebuild the country where 60% of

:36:38. > :36:44.resources are nearly destroyed completely? Would he agree that

:36:45. > :36:50.sorting that out is more important than hope it will come with air

:36:51. > :36:53.strikes. All of that is in place. There is a coordination mechanism

:36:54. > :36:56.for troops on the ground as there is a plan to reconstruct the country

:36:57. > :37:00.after the war, and there is a plan for the transition to take place.

:37:01. > :37:04.Yes, it is corrugated and it will take a long time but that does not

:37:05. > :37:10.mean there is not a plan and that it will not be the right one. -- it is

:37:11. > :37:17.complicated. I admire the sincerity and conviction of the Prime

:37:18. > :37:24.Minister. If after months of intensive bombing, and we can't take

:37:25. > :37:30.Raqqa, and there is limited progress in the wider settlement, what will

:37:31. > :37:32.he then be asking this House to do? I will come back to the House

:37:33. > :37:37.regularly and updated on the progress that has been made. In

:37:38. > :37:42.Iraq, we have made progress. We have seen a reduction of 30% of the back

:37:43. > :37:52.row's territory and it is less capable than it was. -- 30% of

:37:53. > :37:56.Isil's territory. We are dealing with the action that we can take to

:37:57. > :37:59.people as safe and progressively destroys this so-called caliphate.

:38:00. > :38:13.That is what we are discussing and I will give progress reports. Given

:38:14. > :38:19.the shooting down of the Russian plane by Turkey, one of our Nato

:38:20. > :38:23.allies, and the dangers in terms of escalation, can he say more on the

:38:24. > :38:28.communication strategy between the anti-terror forces that he foresees?

:38:29. > :38:33.If we took part in this action, we would be part of the mechanism that

:38:34. > :38:36.exists between the American led coalition and the Russians to make

:38:37. > :38:40.sure these things were not conflicting. The issue does not

:38:41. > :38:46.arise with Turkey because we have overflight rights and Turkey is part

:38:47. > :38:49.of the coalition against Isil. Work needs to be done between Russia and

:38:50. > :38:56.Turkey that that is separate to any issue we might have. Should not

:38:57. > :39:00.intervention follows the effective assembly of local ground forces and

:39:01. > :39:07.an international coalition rather than being a catalyst for it? Given

:39:08. > :39:10.that the Assad regime is responsible for the overwhelming number of

:39:11. > :39:15.atrocities and deaths in Syria, does the Prime Minister agree that any

:39:16. > :39:20.action that sustains that regime would be an acceptable? What I would

:39:21. > :39:25.say to the honourable gentleman is that we believe that taking this

:39:26. > :39:29.action will help to bolster the ground troops that are there. The

:39:30. > :39:35.fact is that they have had a miserable time. They have had the

:39:36. > :39:40.support of Britain and America and Arab states and others, but because

:39:41. > :39:45.of the activities of the regime and Isil they face a difficult

:39:46. > :39:49.situation. Does the action I am proposing help them? Yes, it does.

:39:50. > :39:54.Does the action I am proposing helped to bring about a political

:39:55. > :40:02.solution? Yes. Crucially does it help to keep us safe at home? Yes, I

:40:03. > :40:07.very much believe it does. Military intervention requires just cause,

:40:08. > :40:11.which the Prime Minister has argued superbly today. It requires that it

:40:12. > :40:14.be brought with good intention, which he has done today. I think the

:40:15. > :40:18.weakness of the analysis for those in the House that are still

:40:19. > :40:23.uncertain is about the win ability strategy on the ground, and not

:40:24. > :40:26.creating a vacuum that will be filled by something worse. The

:40:27. > :40:31.honourable gentleman makes a good point and there is no 100% certainty

:40:32. > :40:39.and no perfection here. When we think about winning, I also think

:40:40. > :40:43.about the dangers to us right now. Lose ability to our people and our

:40:44. > :40:46.country and our safety. We have to think about the danger of inaction

:40:47. > :40:58.as well as the uncertainties that there are with action. Thank you for

:40:59. > :41:02.the exercise, Mr Speaker. Two and a half hours into this statement,

:41:03. > :41:07.Prime Minister, would you be able to share with the House some of the

:41:08. > :41:11.details of the seven foiled plots, the nature of the attacks that were

:41:12. > :41:16.on offer, the targets, the cities and the spread of the attacks and

:41:17. > :41:20.how serious they were for the whole of the UK? I have to be careful what

:41:21. > :41:23.I say and the Home Affairs Select Committee from time to time

:41:24. > :41:27.interviews the Director General of our security service and perhaps he

:41:28. > :41:34.can give more detail. What we have seen to date is a series of attacks

:41:35. > :41:39.either inspired by Isil's propaganda or directly by them. We have had the

:41:40. > :41:42.attacks that were avoided that were the product of Hussein and Khan who

:41:43. > :41:48.have been neutralised by the action that was taken. I think the reason

:41:49. > :41:57.for such enhanced concern today is what we were seeing with Isil was

:41:58. > :42:02.attacks which were fairly ill planned, but relying on radicalised

:42:03. > :42:08.individuals to take rapid action, sometimes with a knife, sometimes in

:42:09. > :42:12.other ways. We have seen in Paris a change to a much more planned and

:42:13. > :42:21.thought through attack strategy, that as we used to see without Aida

:42:22. > :42:30.when it was embedded in Pakistan. -- such as we used to see with

:42:31. > :42:33.Al-Qaeda. When you have desperate psychopathic killers combined with

:42:34. > :42:37.the level of planning that the Paris attacks showed, that is one of the

:42:38. > :42:50.reasons why I believe we have to act and act now. I am a member -- as the

:42:51. > :42:55.member on the Labour bench reminded us, there are three prerequisites.

:42:56. > :42:57.If the only objective is to reduce the likelihood of attacks on

:42:58. > :43:05.citizens of the UK, we can argue that intervention is effective. And

:43:06. > :43:11.we don't want to leave behind an environment for encouragement for

:43:12. > :43:16.the new Daesh. We need a ceasefire between the existing non- Daesh

:43:17. > :43:20.factions. That is not just driving for perfection. It is an absolute

:43:21. > :43:26.requirement. The Prime Minister has given us no cause for optimism that

:43:27. > :43:30.such a ceasefire is imminent. What pressure can be put on Turkey to get

:43:31. > :43:36.them to stop bombing the Kurds so they can concentrate on working with

:43:37. > :43:41.us to get to Daesh? I think the concept of ceasefires has got closer

:43:42. > :43:44.because of the Vienna process. Those ceasefires between moderate Syrian

:43:45. > :43:49.opposition forces and Government forces would actually be helped by a

:43:50. > :43:53.more concerted effort to degrade and destroy Isil in Syria. I am not

:43:54. > :44:02.standing here arguing that there is a military only solution to this

:44:03. > :44:07.conflict. There needs to be humanitarian, political, diplomatic,

:44:08. > :44:11.post-conflict action. And the members of the SNP, I hope they will

:44:12. > :44:16.give this their fullest possible thought. They don't have to vote as

:44:17. > :44:23.one block. They can consider and think about these important issues

:44:24. > :44:28.and come to a considered opinion. Patience rewarded.

:44:29. > :44:36.May I thank the Prime Minister for taking so long to give us a chance

:44:37. > :44:45.to ask questions. We do want to see Daesh totally defeated but will we

:44:46. > :44:50.see more aid on the grounds, military and medical, as soon as

:44:51. > :44:56.possible to those we trust, but certainly working with Baghdad to

:44:57. > :45:00.make sure it gets to them accurately? Yes, I can certainly

:45:01. > :45:07.give the honourable gentleman that assurance that there is a plan

:45:08. > :45:11.already in place for putting in the aid, and military assistance

:45:12. > :45:15.particularly to the Iraqi government, but there is more we can

:45:16. > :45:18.do for the moderate Syrian opposition and this is part of a

:45:19. > :45:23.strategy to keep a safe air here while building a more stable Middle

:45:24. > :45:30.East. That is what this is all about, and I hope the clear site and

:45:31. > :45:35.clarity of arguments that the Ulsterman brings to this argument is

:45:36. > :45:44.finds himself in the rights division at the end of the process. I am

:45:45. > :45:51.grateful to the Prime Minister. 103 backbenchers have had the

:45:52. > :45:54.opportunity to question him in 103 minutes so I hope colleagues feel

:45:55. > :46:02.that has been an adequate opposition. Mr Chris Grayling. If I

:46:03. > :46:06.can give the camera crew house the business for next week. Monday,

:46:07. > :46:20.topically, we will have a general debate on the UK role in the Middle

:46:21. > :46:23.East. Tuesday, we have the remaining stages of the immigration Bill

:46:24. > :46:25.followed by a motion to approve a statutory