:03:29. > :03:35.Minister and Labour. As I understand it, Jeremy Corbyn spoke up and spoke
:03:36. > :03:39.about attacks on Syria by the UK immediately after the Prime
:03:40. > :03:43.Minister. But as I understand t the summing up by Labour will be done by
:03:44. > :03:45.Hilary Benn, who takes the opposite point of view and who'll vote for
:03:46. > :03:50.the Government? Incredibly difficult. Hilary Benn was sitting
:03:51. > :03:55.next to Jeremy Corbyn when he made his comments opening the debate. You
:03:56. > :04:00.are right, when the debate closes just before 10.00pm, the summing-up
:04:01. > :04:04.for the official opposition, for Labour, will be made by the Foreign
:04:05. > :04:07.Secretary, Hilary Benn and he will he argue directly against what his
:04:08. > :04:11.leader has been saying. Hilary Benn is on the record as saying he
:04:12. > :04:15.believes that the UK and UK Government ought to go ahead and
:04:16. > :04:18.take military action in Syria, to extend the air strikes. That shows,
:04:19. > :04:23.just over this whole process, how divisive this issue has been for
:04:24. > :04:26.Syria. The Conservatives, they have rebels, they have people who don't
:04:27. > :04:33.#130r the Prime Minister's line on this, far fewer. Labour is split
:04:34. > :04:38.down the middle on this issue. We had a very fractious Shadow Cabinet
:04:39. > :04:42.meeting on fund this week where Jeremy Corbyn wanted his team it
:04:43. > :04:45.back him and say they would be opposed to air strikes. The Shadow
:04:46. > :04:49.Cabinet said they were not going to wear that. That's why we have this
:04:50. > :04:53.compromise for Labour, where they have a free vote where, they can
:04:54. > :04:56.vote as they please on this one. But it will be, on parliamentary terms,
:04:57. > :05:00.on such a crucial defence and foreign affairs issue, to have the
:05:01. > :05:05.leader of the main Opposition party arguing one thing and then, as the
:05:06. > :05:07.debate closes tonight, his foreign affairs spokesman arguing something
:05:08. > :05:12.completely different. It will be extraordinary in parliamentary
:05:13. > :05:19.terms. #12k3w4r this idea, David of directly challenging people, seems
:05:20. > :05:23.to be the tactic du jour. We had Jeremy Corbyn challenging the Prime
:05:24. > :05:27.Minister to apologise and Angus Robertson of the SNP he was having
:05:28. > :05:33.some success by basically challenging anyone from the
:05:34. > :05:40.Government to explain how many of the 70,000 ground force that is
:05:41. > :05:45.supposedly are there, to move into areas like Raqqa, how many are in
:05:46. > :05:49.Angus Robertson's phrase "moderate" who would support the queft? This is
:05:50. > :05:55.what opponents of David Cameron see as a weak point. He mentioned the
:05:56. > :05:58.figure of 70,000 that his security experts have said were potentially
:05:59. > :06:09.ground troops who could go in to Raqqa and other places in Syria,
:06:10. > :06:14.once Isil had been bombed. But a lot of people say it is far fewer, and
:06:15. > :06:21.they are a disparate group, and their main aim is fighting the Assad
:06:22. > :06:26.regime, not Islamic state And it'll be very difficult to get them to
:06:27. > :06:31.physically coalesce. There is no guarantee they'll want to go to
:06:32. > :06:35.Syria and fight Islamic State. This is a chink, in David Cameron's
:06:36. > :06:38.armour, hence why Angus Robertson and other opposition parties are
:06:39. > :06:41.going for it strongly. Don't go away.
:06:42. > :06:45.The Prime Minister, David Cameron, opened the debate saying Governments
:06:46. > :06:52.of all colours had to make decisions on how to fight terrorism, not
:06:53. > :06:55.whether to. But he was interrupted by Opposition MPs demanding he
:06:56. > :06:59.apologise for his comments that people who planned to vote against
:07:00. > :07:02.military action were terrorist sympathisers. David Cameron said he
:07:03. > :07:07.respected people who disagreed with his position and reminded the House
:07:08. > :07:13.of the case for extending air strikes to Syria. Isil have brutally
:07:14. > :07:17.murdered British hostages. They've inspired the worst British attack
:07:18. > :07:20.against British people since 7/7 on the beaches of Tunisia and plotted
:07:21. > :07:25.atrocity after atrocity on the streets here at home. Since November
:07:26. > :07:28.last year our Security Services have foiled no fewer than seven different
:07:29. > :07:34.plots against our people. This threat is real and the question is
:07:35. > :07:38.this: Do we work with our allies to destroy and degrade this threat and
:07:39. > :07:42.do we go after these terrorists in their heart lands from where they
:07:43. > :07:44.are plotting to kill British people or sit back and wait for them to
:07:45. > :07:46.attack us. The Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn,
:07:47. > :07:49.opposes the bombing, but has given This morning he said public opinion
:07:50. > :07:53.was moving increasingly against what he called
:07:54. > :08:03."an ill-thought-out rush to war". Whether it is a lack of strategy
:08:04. > :08:07.worth the name, the absence of credible ground troops, the missing
:08:08. > :08:10.diplomatic plan for a Syrian settlement, the failure it address
:08:11. > :08:13.the impact of the terrorist threat or the refugee crisis and civilian
:08:14. > :08:17.casualties, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Prime
:08:18. > :08:19.Minister's proposals for military action simply do not stack up.
:08:20. > :08:21.The SNP's Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, said the UK Government
:08:22. > :08:24.would have "a huge problem with legitimacy and mandate" in Scotland
:08:25. > :08:41.It may well win the vote tonight but it will do so with the support of
:08:42. > :08:45.only two out of 59 Scottish MPs. Opinion polls released today show
:08:46. > :08:52.that is 72% of Scots are opposed to the bombing plans of the Government.
:08:53. > :08:54.And in normal circumstances, in a normal country under these
:08:55. > :08:56.circumstances, the Armed Forces would not be deployed.
:08:57. > :08:59.Let's go over to the House of Commons where the debate is taking
:09:00. > :09:08.If we think that the coalition air strikes should continue, can we
:09:09. > :09:13.really say no, when France, having gone through the terrible ordeal of
:09:14. > :09:19.Paris, says they want our help in continuing those air strikes now?
:09:20. > :09:24.And I have argued, in this place and elsewhere, continually, for our
:09:25. > :09:26.country to do far more, to share in the international support for
:09:27. > :09:31.refugees who are fleeing the conflict. I still think we should do
:09:32. > :09:36.much more and not leave it to other countries alone. But that same
:09:37. > :09:42.argument about santurary applies to security. And I don't think we have
:09:43. > :09:47.leave it to other countries to take the strain. I cannot ignore the
:09:48. > :09:51.advice from security experts, that without coalition air strikes over
:09:52. > :09:56.the next 12 months, the threat from Daesh in the region, but also in
:09:57. > :10:01.Europe and in Britain, will be much greater. And I think we have to do
:10:02. > :10:06.our bit to try to contain that threat - not to promise we can
:10:07. > :10:10.defeat or overthrow it in the short term because we cannot but at least
:10:11. > :10:16.to contain what they do. I also think it is important to make sure
:10:17. > :10:20.we degrade their capacity to obliterate the remaining moderate
:10:21. > :10:23.and opposition forces, however big they are, because when Vienna does
:10:24. > :10:28.get properly moving, there has to be opposition forces. It cannot simply
:10:29. > :10:32.be a peace debate involving Assad and Daesh as the only forces left
:10:33. > :10:38.standing. That will never bring peace and security to the region.
:10:39. > :10:42.So, if we are to do our bit, and to take the strain, I think we also
:10:43. > :10:48.need to have more limited objectives than the Prime Minister has set out.
:10:49. > :10:53.In self-defence, to support the peace process, but not just to
:10:54. > :10:58.create a vacuum for Assad to sweep into. It makes the imperative of
:10:59. > :11:04.avoiding civilian casualties even greater. Because where there is any
:11:05. > :11:07.risk that people are being used as human shields to cover targets.
:11:08. > :11:11.However important those targets might be, those air strikes should
:11:12. > :11:14.not go ahead. It makes the imperative of civilian protection
:11:15. > :11:18.even greater And that's not mentioned in the Government's
:11:19. > :11:23.motion. It should be the central objective, not just for the
:11:24. > :11:27.humanitarian troops prevent the refugee crisis but also to prevent
:11:28. > :11:33.the recruitment that fuelled Isis. I think time limits, too T I don't
:11:34. > :11:37.sporan open-ended commitment to air strikes until Daesh are defeated as
:11:38. > :11:42.I know the Foreign Secretary raised yesterday. Because if it isn't
:11:43. > :11:45.working in six months, or if it proves counter-productive, we should
:11:46. > :11:51.be ready to review and we should also be ready to withdraw. And we
:11:52. > :11:55.will need to review this. I think tonight we should lend the
:11:56. > :12:01.Government support and keep that under review, not to give them an
:12:02. > :12:05.open-ended commitment that this should carry on, whatever the
:12:06. > :12:09.consequences might be. I would say finally to the Government - I have
:12:10. > :12:12.#1e7d their argument but if we want coalition air strikes to continue on
:12:13. > :12:16.an international basis, we should be part of that. -- I have accepted
:12:17. > :12:20.their argument. But I would urge them to accept my argument, that we
:12:21. > :12:23.should do more to be part of supporting santurary for refugees
:12:24. > :12:27.fleeing that conflict, too. And there are no easy answers in here
:12:28. > :12:31.but I would say, too, in the interests of cohesion in our
:12:32. > :12:36.politics and in our country, the way we conduct this debate is immensely
:12:37. > :12:39.important. None of us, however we vote tonight, are terrorist
:12:40. > :12:45.sympathisers and none of us will have blood on our hands. The blood
:12:46. > :12:53.has been drawn by Isis, Daesh, in Paris, across the world and that's
:12:54. > :12:56.who we must stand against. THE SPEAKER: A five-minute limb I it on
:12:57. > :13:05.backbench speeches will now apply. -- limit.
:13:06. > :13:16.Has been a great deal of talk about solidarity with our French allies
:13:17. > :13:25.following Paris. It is all very well to talk. To make a mockery of our
:13:26. > :13:35.own credibility if we ignore security council resolution which
:13:36. > :13:41.has been secured unanimously. We cannot ignore that call and expect
:13:42. > :13:47.our international partners to look at as with any shred of respect or
:13:48. > :13:52.goodwill. How can we have any self respect if we read this fight to the
:13:53. > :13:58.brave Kurdish woman fighting with antiquated weapons? But this is not
:13:59. > :14:03.all about national pride, or self-respect. It is about keeping
:14:04. > :14:06.the British people safe. Those at risk are being murdered by
:14:07. > :14:12.terrorists and those at risk are being brainwashed into joining them.
:14:13. > :14:17.I welcome the Prime Minister's announcement that 5 million will go
:14:18. > :14:21.towards the establishment of a unit to counter extremism. And the
:14:22. > :14:30.announcement of a review to root out those funding extremists in the UK.
:14:31. > :14:36.According to a University Professor at 95% of Daesh recruits are signed
:14:37. > :14:40.up by friends and family. There are few things more dangerous than
:14:41. > :14:45.misfit to think they can live out side the law being recruited by the
:14:46. > :14:50.lure of Daesh. It is one of the most barbaric and she digitally dangerous
:14:51. > :14:54.enemies we have ever faced. Its ability to recruit or delete
:14:55. > :14:58.Westerners and transform them into murderers and suicide bombers and
:14:59. > :15:05.its lack of mercy to any man, woman or child are unparalleled. It
:15:06. > :15:16.creates, in sleaze and decapitates. It's victims are Muslims, currents,
:15:17. > :15:20.French, British. It's a growth depends on the steady beat of
:15:21. > :15:25.battlefield Victor Ruiz, looting along the way. It plays headlines
:15:26. > :15:33.which reinforce apocalyptic propaganda. A manager of a store in
:15:34. > :15:36.Raqqa says that Daesh loses popularity amongst ordinary people
:15:37. > :15:42.when it loses its brilliant Victor Ruiz. That is at the heart of this
:15:43. > :15:46.argument. There are very destruction of the caliphate State in itself is
:15:47. > :15:50.the right thing. It's existence along with its self proclaimed
:15:51. > :16:06.Califf and the nonsense that they have fulfilled what happy ideology.
:16:07. > :16:11.-- Wahabi ideology. We're joined this afternoon by Paul
:16:12. > :16:14.Gilbride, who is a former Scottish political correspondent and
:16:15. > :16:24.columnist for the Daily Express. The debate has been overshadowed by
:16:25. > :16:27.David Cameron's intemperate comments about sympathisers. He has
:16:28. > :16:35.undermined his own argument and presentation. In what should be a
:16:36. > :16:40.crucial debate ahead. Should he have stood up at the beginning and said
:16:41. > :16:43.something along the lines of, I did not mean what you think I meant in
:16:44. > :16:48.those comments last mate and if anyone thinks I am suggesting that
:16:49. > :16:56.just because they disagree with me, I am sorry. It would have taken the
:16:57. > :17:03.sting out of that issue straightaway and then he could have proceeded
:17:04. > :17:07.with his arguments. This blind determination to appear prime
:17:08. > :17:12.ministerial, never apologise, has undermined his argument. The cause
:17:13. > :17:16.you were impressed with other than that. Yes, other than that I thought
:17:17. > :17:23.he was impressive. He too each point and explained why extending the
:17:24. > :17:27.bombing into Syria was important. But each time there was an
:17:28. > :17:31.intervention it seems, certainly at the beginning of his speech, it was
:17:32. > :17:38.about a demand for him to apologise. Everyone from Alex Salmond, to come
:17:39. > :17:45.in front, every time there was an intervention it was this point. In
:17:46. > :17:50.many ways from a former PR man that is one of the worst PR disaster she
:17:51. > :17:55.could have had at a crucial time before setting out his case for
:17:56. > :18:02.Britain warming Isil. He might say he could afford to because Labour
:18:03. > :18:07.have a problem. If it Cooper, one of the leadership contenders,
:18:08. > :18:15.supporting with qualifications, extending the inner strikes into
:18:16. > :18:20.Syria. We heard Jeremy Corbyn opposing it. Labour's case will be
:18:21. > :18:26.summed up by Hilary Benn who will vote against his own meter and with
:18:27. > :18:31.the Prime Minister. What an extraordinary situation. The Leader
:18:32. > :18:35.of the Opposition opening a debate with one point of view and his
:18:36. > :18:41.foreign fears spokesman causing it with the opposite point of view,
:18:42. > :18:49.supporting the Tory Government. It is indicative of what Labour is
:18:50. > :18:52.undergoing at the moment. It speaks a lot to, what does Labour stand
:18:53. > :18:55.for? Let's go back to
:18:56. > :18:57.our political correspondent, David Porter, who's on College Green with
:18:58. > :19:07.the Conservative MP Iain Stewart. Thank you. Yes, with me is Iain
:19:08. > :19:11.Stewart, who represents Milton Keynes constituency. He is also
:19:12. > :19:20.parliamentary private secretary to David Mundell. He is a Scot through
:19:21. > :19:24.and through. Why are you voting in favour of this military action? This
:19:25. > :19:28.is a difficult decision that every MP has got to make. On balance I
:19:29. > :19:34.fear that the risks and costs of not taking action are significantly
:19:35. > :19:40.greater than any risk of taking action. There is a real and credible
:19:41. > :19:46.and specific threat to the UK from Daesh at the moment. Anything we can
:19:47. > :19:50.do to reduce that threat and the risk to lives in the UK and any
:19:51. > :19:58.other Western Norwich City we have to take. What about the argument
:19:59. > :20:04.that if you do attack Isil in Syria it is more likely they will at
:20:05. > :20:09.Britain? We are already at the top of their target list. The Prime
:20:10. > :20:14.Minister said in the debate only on that the security services have
:20:15. > :20:19.already foiled seven very specific terrorist attacks on this country.
:20:20. > :20:23.It is not could they attack us, they are planning to already. But
:20:24. > :20:27.underlines why we have to strike at their heart and try and reduce as
:20:28. > :20:32.much as we can the threats to this country. In military terms will it
:20:33. > :20:36.make much of a difference with America and France taking such a big
:20:37. > :20:41.rule or is it more about symbolism? It is not about symbolism. We have
:20:42. > :20:47.the specific contribution that we can make. Our allies are asking us
:20:48. > :20:52.to make that contribution. We cannot subcontract our defence to others.
:20:53. > :20:58.Yes, we do have to take part. But no one is pretending that if strikes in
:20:59. > :21:02.Syria either be all and end all. The motion is a wide ranging motion
:21:03. > :21:10.looking at different aspects that we have to take in this conflict. It is
:21:11. > :21:16.not a new conflict either. We are already at war with Daesh in Iraq.
:21:17. > :21:20.They do not respect the border between Iraq and Syria. This is
:21:21. > :21:26.merely extending it into areas where they are strong. Hopefully we can
:21:27. > :21:29.reduce specific and real threats to this country. The Prime Minister has
:21:30. > :21:38.made much of British military technology. But inevitably in any a
:21:39. > :21:41.real campaign there is an inherent risk of civilian casualties. To use
:21:42. > :21:46.that awful phrase, collateral damage. The first time that happens
:21:47. > :21:51.there are going to be a lot of people in that place who will feel
:21:52. > :21:56.uncomfortable. You have also got to remember that Daesh are killing
:21:57. > :22:00.people in Syria now. They are killing Muslims. They are throwing
:22:01. > :22:04.gay people off the tops of buildings. These are not nice
:22:05. > :22:10.people. They are causing atrocities now. Our specific contribution, what
:22:11. > :22:15.our allies are asking for, is we have the technology and capability
:22:16. > :22:20.to minimise civilian casualties. That is what the Brimstone missile
:22:21. > :22:39.does. That is the contribution we can make. It would reflect badly on
:22:40. > :22:41.as a free did not answer those calls for help. The Prime Minister has
:22:42. > :22:44.made much of 70,000 potential ground troops in Syria who may take action
:22:45. > :22:46.against Isil. When people look into this it seems far more difficult to
:22:47. > :22:49.try and mobilise those forces, whatever the numbers are. And I
:22:50. > :22:52.think there is a fair amount of scepticism that even if Britain does
:22:53. > :22:55.not put boots on the ground, the boots on the ground already there
:22:56. > :22:57.will rise up and stick them on. The figure of 70,000 comes from the
:22:58. > :23:01.Joint Intelligence Committee. It is a credible figure. But nobody is
:23:02. > :23:08.pretending that these are a well drilled, unified force. But it does
:23:09. > :23:12.not include extremist jihadist who we will not work with. The danger is
:23:13. > :23:17.if we do not involve ourselves now that number will diminish and make
:23:18. > :23:20.the task of defeating Daesh even more difficult. This is not a
:23:21. > :23:24.straightforward good versus bad conflict. There are some
:23:25. > :23:30.questionable people that we will have to work with but the greater
:23:31. > :23:34.goal is to defeat Daesh and reduce the security threats that is real
:23:35. > :23:38.and present to our country. But those of us with long memories
:23:39. > :23:42.remember the security experts told as it was 45 minutes until Saddam
:23:43. > :23:47.Hussein could launch missiles on large parts of the Middle East and
:23:48. > :23:53.Western Europe. But proved to be a fallacy. I accept that. I was not in
:23:54. > :23:55.Parliament at the time of the Iraq debate. I capability as the west to
:23:56. > :24:00.respond to these terror threats was debate. I capability as the west to
:24:01. > :24:02.administered by that claim. I am not pretending otherwise.
:24:03. > :24:22.administered by that claim. I am not a cohesive force but we have to work
:24:23. > :24:27.with it. And if we do not work with them know they will be attacked and
:24:28. > :24:32.their numbers will diminish. This entire situation is a balance of
:24:33. > :24:37.risks and costs, challengers. I think on balance, I have thought
:24:38. > :24:41.this through carefully, our national is that it requires us to take
:24:42. > :24:49.action now. Thank you very much for joining us.
:24:50. > :24:53.Let us go back to the House of Commons now. I fully understand all
:24:54. > :26:38.the caveats that colleagues have put Commons now. I fully understand all
:26:39. > :26:41.draw lessons of one kind or another. The Prime Minister is
:26:42. > :26:47.absolutely right to think that we have got to look at the present
:26:48. > :26:51.situation and the future. We hopefully have learned lessons, both
:26:52. > :26:57.political and military, from that war, but we could end up with having
:26:58. > :27:01.our current operations, our current politics, determined by past
:27:02. > :27:08.experiences. Our predecessors sat in this commons in the 1930s,
:27:09. > :27:13.determined never to have a Great War again. The Labour Party was divided.
:27:14. > :27:17.There were pacifists, those who wanted collective security. My own
:27:18. > :27:23.party supported appeasement, which the overwhelming majority of the
:27:24. > :27:27.British public did not, because they genuinely, they were not evil
:27:28. > :27:31.people, they wanted to prevent another war. The fields because they
:27:32. > :27:34.were dealing with people in other countries who were not prepared to
:27:35. > :27:47.negotiate. The second lesson learned from that was in 1956. Anthony Eden
:27:48. > :27:53.believed that Nasser was another miscellaneous. I believe we should
:27:54. > :27:57.put to one side where we stood on these other campaigns and look at
:27:58. > :28:01.what the situation is today. The final point I would speak on this is
:28:02. > :28:07.that there has been a great debate on the 70,000 moderate or
:28:08. > :28:12.non-moderates people who might or might not provide ground forces. I
:28:13. > :28:17.am sure their leader of the SNP is trying to do a survey to answer
:28:18. > :28:27.whether they are moderate or not. I have always run out of time. We know
:28:28. > :28:30.in the Second World War that when Churchill and reserve built were
:28:31. > :28:36.looking at resistance in Europe, it was difficult to try and find out
:28:37. > :28:42.whether people were commonest, non-Communist, Gaullists, the
:28:43. > :28:47.criteria was where the fighting the gnats ease. There is not an easy
:28:48. > :28:52.solution to this. The Prime Minister has laid out as far as he can a set
:28:53. > :28:54.of proposals and I would urge the House to vote with the Prime
:28:55. > :29:00.Minister on this occasion. Our Westminster correspondent
:29:01. > :29:02.David Porter joins us again and he's with the Shadow Scottish
:29:03. > :29:12.Secretary, Ian Murray. I do indeed. Big Ben have just
:29:13. > :29:14.chimed 3.00 for us. Iain Murray you will be voting against military
:29:15. > :29:19.action tonight. Why that course of action? I think it is an incredibly
:29:20. > :29:23.marginal decision. I think all MPs have gone through a long process of
:29:24. > :29:26.trying to decide what is the best way forward. We fully appreciate the
:29:27. > :29:30.UK is involved in air strikes in Iraq but I think those have been
:29:31. > :29:33.successful because of the ground forces that are there, backed up by
:29:34. > :29:38.the Iraqi and Kurdish ground forces being able to retake the ground and
:29:39. > :29:42.being able to move Isil, Daesh out of that ground and away else where.
:29:43. > :29:46.The difficulty in Syria and we have seen this in the Chamber already in
:29:47. > :29:50.the short debate we have had, is there are no Syrian ground troops.
:29:51. > :29:56.The Prime Minister says there are 70,000. He said the 70,000 have come
:29:57. > :29:58.from national security advisors but the foreign affairs Defence
:29:59. > :30:01.Committee and the Defence Select Committee and the Prime Minister in
:30:02. > :30:04.the House hasn't been able to clarify what those numbers are, and
:30:05. > :30:08.if they are actually for or against us and hasn't been able to clarify
:30:09. > :30:12.how that will all be co-ordinated. So, on balance, I just don't think
:30:13. > :30:17.extending air strikes to Syria is going to make a blind bit of
:30:18. > :30:21.difference with regards to how this situation is resolved. It is very
:30:22. > :30:26.noticeable that there is a different tone to the debate today than there
:30:27. > :30:30.was when the Prime Minister came to the House last week. There is a real
:30:31. > :30:34.edginess to it, is that because of comments that the Prime Minister has
:30:35. > :30:37.made, or is it because people are now realising - we are voting
:30:38. > :30:42.potentially to put or troops in harm's way? A bit of both. And I
:30:43. > :30:48.think the Prime Minister saying last night that the people voting no were
:30:49. > :30:52.apoll gists for terrorists. I think that was unfortunate and I think it
:30:53. > :30:56.is unfortunate he hasn't apologised. Not just for those who are
:30:57. > :31:01.supporting military action but those opposing it and it has deflected
:31:02. > :31:06.away from the incredibly serious issues which we have to deal with
:31:07. > :31:09.it. It is a difficult situation for Members of Parliament and the
:31:10. > :31:13.country. This is a very marginal decision. I think that means people
:31:14. > :31:16.have a heightened sense of the responsibilities. There is also some
:31:17. > :31:20.people in that Chamber who are still incredibly torn about the designs we
:31:21. > :31:25.should respect it is incredibly difficult and we should always be
:31:26. > :31:30.reaching out to the people who share different views, and know that they
:31:31. > :31:34.are perfectly entitled to do so. Not wishing to labour the war analogy
:31:35. > :31:39.too much, but your own party, the Labour Party is virtually at civil
:31:40. > :31:44.war. You had Jeremy Corbyn standing up making his points against
:31:45. > :31:47.military action, sitting next to him, Hilary Benn, the Shadow Foreign
:31:48. > :31:53.Secretary, arguing for military action? Well, the Labour movement
:31:54. > :31:58.have always had a proud tradition of being a Democratic Party. We are a
:31:59. > :32:02.broad church party. Jeremy Corbyn has recognised that and that is why
:32:03. > :32:06.he has allowed a free vote. I think you will find when Hilary Benn wraps
:32:07. > :32:09.up the debate later on this evening, he says identical things to what
:32:10. > :32:12.Jeremy Corbyn has said and indeed will reflect pretty much what the
:32:13. > :32:15.Prime Minister has said in his opening speech as well. The
:32:16. > :32:18.difference comes at the end of that process, when Jeremy came to the
:32:19. > :32:22.conclusion, after seeing all the evidence, he thinks in terms of a
:32:23. > :32:26.marginal decision we shouldn't extend air strikes. And Hilary Benn
:32:27. > :32:33.will say - given all the evidence in front of me, I think we should
:32:34. > :32:35.extend air strikes to Syria. It is a perking effectually legitimate
:32:36. > :32:43.difference of opinion. I'm glad there is a free vote. O to reflect
:32:44. > :32:46.on this issue or not to have allowed Labour members to have had their
:32:47. > :32:49.voice, I think would have been a disservice to the country. Talking
:32:50. > :32:54.about the new style of politics, what do you make of the reports that
:32:55. > :32:57.certain Labour MPs who said they are going to support military action,
:32:58. > :33:00.have been the subject to what I think most people would think is
:33:01. > :33:04.some pretty hardcore abuse? Well, it is dreadful. Social media can be a
:33:05. > :33:12.place where people can sprout off without any thought. All that of
:33:13. > :33:16.abuse can stop. But it was tragic stha the Member of Parliament for
:33:17. > :33:19.Walthamstow, probably one of the best of the 2010 intakes had people
:33:20. > :33:23.campaigning outside her house yesterday on the basis she was
:33:24. > :33:28.undecided. It is unacceptable. It is happening to Peter Kyle today as
:33:29. > :33:32.well, the Labour MP in Hove. These decision are difficult. Nobody knows
:33:33. > :33:35.if this decision will be the right one, whatever decision Parliament
:33:36. > :33:39.makes tonight and nobody really knows if it'll make Britain safer or
:33:40. > :33:43.not. These are difficult decisions and that kind of activity is totally
:33:44. > :33:48.and utterly unacceptal and must stop. If you have that level of
:33:49. > :33:51.abuse, to put it bluntly, will the Labour Party, will the Parliamentary
:33:52. > :33:54.Labour Party be able to put itself back together again after this? Well
:33:55. > :33:59.the Parliamentary Labour Party is a very collegiate group of people. We
:34:00. > :34:05.all work together for the common good of our Labour values and to get
:34:06. > :34:08.Labour back into Government, and to respect our constituents' views.
:34:09. > :34:13.Whether you are for today or against it is irrelevant in terms of the
:34:14. > :34:17.Parliamentary Labour Party. Jeremy have made his view known, I have
:34:18. > :34:23.made my views known which are different to close colleagues. I did
:34:24. > :34:30.a debate yesterday with Toby Perkins, I was in a close college of
:34:31. > :34:33.him. He was yes I was no. It was a perfectly collegiate debate. That's
:34:34. > :34:37.what politics should be about. Thank you for joining us. We'll let you
:34:38. > :34:39.get back to the House of Commons and the debate. Back to you.
:34:40. > :34:44.Paul Gilbride was listening to that with me.
:34:45. > :34:49.We heard there will one of the Conservative members saying - let's
:34:50. > :34:55.put the past behind us and consider the evidence. But you can sort of
:34:56. > :35:00.understand when people hear a very specific analysis of how many ground
:35:01. > :35:03.forces are supposedly there to help the Western powers, that it comes
:35:04. > :35:06.from the Joint Intelligence Committee and you have got to trust
:35:07. > :35:13.it, that the alarms bells start going off? Absolutely. It is shades
:35:14. > :35:19.of Blair's 45 minute warning with Saddam Hussein and his missiles.
:35:20. > :35:24.Look, these 70,000 moderates that David Cameron seemed to pluck out of
:35:25. > :35:30.the air from the Joint Intelligence Committee last week, these can't
:35:31. > :35:33.people that are -- aren't people sitting about, sipping shinny lattes
:35:34. > :35:39.and flicking through the Guardian. They may not be out and out
:35:40. > :35:45.Islamists, but they will be owe supposed to what we consider Bern
:35:46. > :35:50.values. But as David Cameron says, short of putting Western boots on
:35:51. > :35:55.the ground, this is all we have to work W as was said earlier, it is
:35:56. > :35:58.not black and white, it is variant shades of grey. Maybe if these guys
:35:59. > :36:04.see us getting involved with Isil and the prospect of progress in the
:36:05. > :36:08.Vienna talks, may coalesce into some kind of fighting unit worthy of the
:36:09. > :36:12.name. It is a big if. The other side of this, Paul, is someone, I think
:36:13. > :36:16.again it was a Conservative member asked - I think it was Angus
:36:17. > :36:21.Robertson, I maybe wrong - a couple of hours ago on this debate, he Saud
:36:22. > :36:24.- hang on, wait a minute, if you are saying we shouldn't get involved
:36:25. > :36:27.because there aren't 70,000 on the grounds, are you saying the
:36:28. > :36:31.Americans and French should not be involved in military action in Syria
:36:32. > :36:36.as well? You know, there is that side of it. There absolutely is that
:36:37. > :36:40.side of it. It is not a perfect situation as David Cameron said.
:36:41. > :36:46.That in itself shouldn't stop us from not taking any action. The fact
:36:47. > :36:50.of the matter is if you want to degrade Isis you need to hit their
:36:51. > :36:54.command and control centres and they are over the border in Syria based
:36:55. > :36:59.around mainly Raqqa. There are two tracks here - there is a discussion
:37:00. > :37:03.about whether military action or the UK's participation in noe it in
:37:04. > :37:08.Syria would be effective but a parallel track - an argument to say
:37:09. > :37:13.- well, require theive of the results of that, Britain needs to
:37:14. > :37:17.get involved, quite literalry to fight its way to the negotiating
:37:18. > :37:24.table. -- irrespective of that. Absolutely. I don't think it should
:37:25. > :37:29.be underestimated, forgotten. If that atrocity in Paris had happened
:37:30. > :37:33.on the streets of Britain, we would expect the French to stand together
:37:34. > :37:37.with us in tackling those responsible. We absolutely would and
:37:38. > :37:42.I think in terms of the international community, the
:37:43. > :37:47.civilised world, Britain has got to stand shoulder-to-shoulder even if
:37:48. > :37:51.it's a small escalation in its military commitment. It has to be
:37:52. > :37:53.seen to be doing that, to show solidarity, if nothing else. Right,
:37:54. > :37:56.Paul, we'll come back to you later. David Porter is still on
:37:57. > :38:04.College Green and he's with the That is hae right. Douglas Chapman,
:38:05. > :38:08.thank you for joining us this afternoon. How do you counter the
:38:09. > :38:12.Prime Minister's argument - you will be voting against military actions
:38:13. > :38:16.tonight, that it is more dangerous to do nothing than to take military
:38:17. > :38:20.action? Let's be honest, it is not as if we are doing nothing. With a
:38:21. > :38:24.we have decided to do today is take the stance that prevents the UK to
:38:25. > :38:29.go ahead and bomb or further bomb into Syria. There are lots of things
:38:30. > :38:32.that the UK can be doing and are already doing in terms of providing
:38:33. > :38:36.other kinds of military support and intelligence which I think is a
:38:37. > :38:39.great strength of the UK and we should be doing more of that,
:38:40. > :38:43.instead of just joining a batched ten other nations that are quite
:38:44. > :38:46.honestly, just bombing for the sake of it at the moment, without any
:38:47. > :38:51.real sense that there is an end game. What happens if you are flying
:38:52. > :38:55.over Iraq, the RAF is flying over Iraq, it sees an Isil target which
:38:56. > :39:00.may be a convoy or something like that, it goes into Syria. Under your
:39:01. > :39:04.argument, you couldn't take them on. But under the Prime Minister's
:39:05. > :39:09.argument, you would be able tying action against them? Well, you know,
:39:10. > :39:13.it is not just about the bombing campaign that actually we can take.
:39:14. > :39:17.There are a range of actions the Government could have been taking
:39:18. > :39:20.over the last 12 months in terms of cutting off supplies, cutting off
:39:21. > :39:25.their access to social media, which is used a lot by Isis and Daesh to
:39:26. > :39:34.spread their vile messages. So there is a whole range of other things we
:39:35. > :39:38.could be doing, in terms of the case being put against forces in Syria
:39:39. > :39:42.the negative forces in Syria. A whole bunch of stuff they could be
:39:43. > :39:47.doing, other than bombing. Surely the argument is you just don't do
:39:48. > :39:50.one thing, you go across the border, take them on militarily and
:39:51. > :39:55.financially, try to kauft the supply of funds and as you say, you deal
:39:56. > :39:59.with the social media side. -- try to cut off the supply.
:40:00. > :40:03.You can't do it by one thing, you have to do it by all. That's the
:40:04. > :40:06.argument the Government put forward today. The Americans have been
:40:07. > :40:11.bombing in Syria for the best part of a year. We are still at a stage
:40:12. > :40:16.where Syria still remains quite a, it is a mess of a nation. We need to
:40:17. > :40:19.take more direct action, perhaps, through more diplomatic means, for
:40:20. > :40:22.example, of making sure that we can make the case that Syria needs to
:40:23. > :40:27.move towards stability and peace, rather than just expanding another
:40:28. > :40:31.arm of violence that we have seen far too much of in the Middle East
:40:32. > :40:34.in recent years. On this issue, we have seen that there are divisions
:40:35. > :40:39.within the Conservative Party, not as great as the divisions within the
:40:40. > :40:45.Labour Party. Why is it to a man and a woman that the SNP group down here
:40:46. > :40:48.is so solid? Well, I think we have been solid right through from the
:40:49. > :40:52.beginning of May, irrespective of what the issue has been, whether it
:40:53. > :40:55.has been on fighting austerity or this issue today that we have about
:40:56. > :41:01.bombing fourth bombing of Iraq - sorry, further bombing of Syria. The
:41:02. > :41:07.group is very much together. While we have a very robust debate within
:41:08. > :41:11.the group, you know, the line of travel that we usually take is one
:41:12. > :41:17.that we all stand up and agree to. That's just been part of the make-up
:41:18. > :41:19.of the SNP for some time. You can see that for the Scottish
:41:20. > :41:23.Government. They tend to stick together on the line and make sure
:41:24. > :41:26.we have a very solid case to put, and that's based on principle.
:41:27. > :41:32.Discipline other parties would love to have. It seems extraordinary,
:41:33. > :41:37.amongst 54 individuals, that there are no dissenting views whatsoever
:41:38. > :41:42.on what, probably if you spoke to ten people in this area now, there
:41:43. > :41:46.would be different views? I can say that the argument has always been
:41:47. > :41:50.positive, trying to look at diplomatic solutions, trying to make
:41:51. > :41:55.the Government look at possibilities of more actions via the UN and we
:41:56. > :42:00.have taken a firm and very pragmatic line in terms of what we want to do
:42:01. > :42:05.in Syria. But at no point, from my experience, has anyone Saud - yes,
:42:06. > :42:10.we should be going in and bombing in Syria, where we have already got ten
:42:11. > :42:15.nations already bombing in Syria and why bombing by the UK, as an 11th
:42:16. > :42:18.force would not have a huge impact on the end result. When the votes
:42:19. > :42:24.are counted tonight, it is likely that 57 out of the 59 MPs from
:42:25. > :42:29.Scotland will have voted against military action, against extending
:42:30. > :42:33.the air raids. Of what is going to be the knock-on effect of that in
:42:34. > :42:37.politics in the next six or seven months? I think it is part and
:42:38. > :42:42.parcel of where we are in Scotland. We have a certain view. We take a
:42:43. > :42:47.view on our place, in the world, how we can develop our economy, the kind
:42:48. > :42:52.of society we want and want our kids to grow up in. And if we keep making
:42:53. > :42:56.that move, that we are obviously at odds with the rest of the UK. I
:42:57. > :43:00.think it strengthens the case to say that maybe we should be think being
:43:01. > :43:04.how we do things differently in the future. Maybe it is an opportunity
:43:05. > :43:07.that again will come to the people of Scotland in the not too distant
:43:08. > :43:11.future. Thank you very much for inJoing me. You can get back to the
:43:12. > :43:12.debate in the House of Commons. Back to you.
:43:13. > :43:13.Let's go back to the House of Commons for the final time this
:43:14. > :43:21.Let's go back to the House of Commons for the final time this
:43:22. > :43:37.I was so proud when I watched England fans singing the French
:43:38. > :43:42.national anthem, standing shoulder to shoulder with our friends and
:43:43. > :43:47.allies. How could we not do that today? But if you want to know what
:43:48. > :43:53.has really pushed me into the position where we have on balance to
:43:54. > :43:58.back military action against Daesh it is my personal experiences in the
:43:59. > :44:04.refugee camps this summer. I have been personally moved and affected
:44:05. > :44:08.by what I met. I could give you a anecdote after anecdote that would
:44:09. > :44:19.break your heart. A 7 -year-old lad being lifted from a dengue and he
:44:20. > :44:22.said, are Isil here? I cannot castigate the Prime Minister for not
:44:23. > :44:33.taking enough refugees and for Britain not standing as tall as it
:44:34. > :44:37.should. We must also do everything to eradicate that which is the
:44:38. > :44:46.source of people fleeing from that terror. We are under the spectre of
:44:47. > :44:51.a shocking and illegal war in Iraq and that is a lesson from history
:44:52. > :44:55.that we must learn from. The danger is today that for too many people we
:44:56. > :45:00.will be learning the wrong lessons from history if we choose not to
:45:01. > :45:05.stand with those refugees, not to stand as part of the international
:45:06. > :45:09.community of nations. This is a tough call. On balance it is right
:45:10. > :45:18.to take action to defeat and degrade this evil death cult.
:45:19. > :45:25.I entirely endorse the comments of the leader of the Liberal Democrats.
:45:26. > :45:30.Until we remove Daesh we are all at risk. We are at risk with revoked
:45:31. > :45:38.bombing in Iraq and in Syria. I was in France and saw the standard
:45:39. > :45:42.reaction of the French populace. There is no negotiation with people
:45:43. > :45:46.who will gun down people in a restaurant or take a bomb to a
:45:47. > :45:54.football stadium. A priority is to remove Daesh. It is nonsense that if
:45:55. > :46:00.we all voted one year ago to bomb in Iraq that are aeroplanes stop at an
:46:01. > :46:04.arbitrary boundary in the sand. If we are invited by our severely
:46:05. > :46:10.damaged and her allies and neighbours the French, it is a
:46:11. > :46:14.dereliction that we do not offer that technology. I have taught in
:46:15. > :46:19.the past few days to experienced Allied generals. There is also an
:46:20. > :46:23.intangible benefit. There is no doubt that having the UK playing a
:46:24. > :46:30.full part in a Coalition, bringing intelligence planning, experience,
:46:31. > :46:34.does have an intangible moral and philosophical boost to the campaign.
:46:35. > :46:40.I am quite clear that this is about the safety of our citizens. We are
:46:41. > :46:48.better off if we engage in this activity. I would like to touch on
:46:49. > :46:55.that artificial boundary. They have been called nation states. Syria and
:46:56. > :47:03.Iraq were treated in the 1920s eight of elements of the Ottoman Empire.
:47:04. > :47:15.If you look at Iraq there were three elements. The Kurds emerged from
:47:16. > :47:19.World War I. They were promised a country. They did not get one. We
:47:20. > :47:26.are living with the consequences of what was decided then. When I was at
:47:27. > :47:30.Cambridge a professor talked about the fat cats, France and Britain
:47:31. > :47:35.came out of the First World War with these new entities, increasing their
:47:36. > :47:40.sphere of influence. But was always presumed that they would be French
:47:41. > :47:48.and British influence, passive or active, and Iraq in the 1920s. This
:47:49. > :47:51.system work until 1958 when the King was killed. It sort of worked under
:47:52. > :48:01.the horrendous dictatorships of Sadam Hussein and Assad. It has
:48:02. > :48:04.broken down now. It could have worked but it was a terrible
:48:05. > :48:10.decision by the American presidents to withdraw the garrison. They
:48:11. > :48:20.should have been there for the long-term. The reason why the
:48:21. > :48:24.Americans withdrew was because Iraq would not give an Agreement under
:48:25. > :48:30.which US forces would not be liable to Iraq law. That is by the
:48:31. > :48:35.inelegant were forced to withdraw. And of course the regime
:48:36. > :48:39.inelegant were forced to withdraw. corrupt has now gone. We now need to
:48:40. > :48:43.look at how do we now need to look at how demeaning these entities
:48:44. > :48:47.work. It is not an option to destroy these boundaries. What I would put
:48:48. > :48:51.to the front bench, and that is a line in the motion giving grounds
:48:52. > :49:02.for this, follow what the current Prime Minister is
:49:03. > :49:05.for this, follow what the current War I boundaries. If you look at how
:49:06. > :49:12.the Ottoman Empire do that, they left the locals to run their own
:49:13. > :49:15.show. There is a clear breakdown in Iraq where you could give
:49:16. > :49:22.significant autonomy within these entities. We will not get support
:49:23. > :49:25.for locals to remove Daesh, considering the terrible conditions
:49:26. > :49:29.they are living under, if they do not feel they will emerge at the end
:49:30. > :49:31.of this difficult process with an entity to which they are loyal and
:49:32. > :51:36.in which they are safe. entity to which they are loyal and
:51:37. > :51:42.not happened with MPs be considering extending that action? It is
:51:43. > :51:46.impossible to know. Shankill Shaik had an impact. It has brought about
:51:47. > :52:00.a significant change in the attitude of Russia. -- Sharm el-Sheikh had an
:52:01. > :52:08.impact. There is no a Security Council
:52:09. > :52:13.resolution which authorises and calls on us as people who have the
:52:14. > :52:18.capacity to do this to do what we can. What about the argument that if
:52:19. > :52:22.you extend the action to Isil in Syria you might make Britain more of
:52:23. > :52:27.a target? I understand that they are already a
:52:28. > :52:32.target by virtue of the fact that we are part of the military initiative
:52:33. > :52:36.in Iraq with other countries, at the invitation of the Government of
:52:37. > :52:42.Iraq. Not only that, also because of what we are. Daesh will attack
:52:43. > :52:50.Western liberal democracies such as I was. I and a standard that concern
:52:51. > :52:52.but I would say we are already just about at the highest state of
:52:53. > :52:57.anti-terror alert in this country and you have to understand also that
:52:58. > :53:03.Daesh are a dreadful organisation. They subjugate women. They thought
:53:04. > :53:10.the people of roofs. They take the terror across the globe. This is a
:53:11. > :53:16.threat that has to be confronted legally with a political and
:53:17. > :53:20.diplomatic strategy moved forward through international organisations
:53:21. > :53:23.like the United Nations and then afterwards you have to have a plan
:53:24. > :53:27.for stabilisation and reconstruction. That is another
:53:28. > :53:32.thing that has changed in recent weeks. The progress through the
:53:33. > :53:35.Vienna talks which has brought 63 different nations and two
:53:36. > :53:39.organisations together to come forward with that plan for
:53:40. > :53:43.stabilisation and reconstruction. And if you are going to do that then
:53:44. > :53:47.you have got to be prepared to be in there for quite some time and to
:53:48. > :53:52.commit money to do it. But the cost of not doing that would be dreadful.
:53:53. > :53:58.Yet there is a lot of scepticism about 70,000 troops that David
:53:59. > :54:03.Cameron has talked about, that they are there or are willing to get
:54:04. > :54:08.involved in action. Everybody says you will not achieve what you want
:54:09. > :54:14.to without boots on the ground. Boots on the ground will have to
:54:15. > :54:18.come from inside Syria and possibly neighbouring countries. It cannot be
:54:19. > :54:23.European or American forces. Since a rack that is no longer possible. I
:54:24. > :54:30.would like to see some of the Gulf States like Saudi Arabia coming up
:54:31. > :54:33.much more firmly to the plate, Turkey should be doing more to cut
:54:34. > :54:40.off the finances and oil supplies for Daesh, but that is something
:54:41. > :54:46.that you can achieve through international action of the sort
:54:47. > :54:52.that we are able to make. Then a Scottish context, 57 out of
:54:53. > :54:57.59 Scottish MPs will vote against militant reaction. How in the coming
:54:58. > :55:02.weeks and months will that play into the wider Scottish political
:55:03. > :55:06.arguments? That is a consequence of the fact that the SNP are so
:55:07. > :55:11.dominant as a force in Scottish politics since the May election. And
:55:12. > :55:16.of course the whole is quite remarkable discipline. There is no
:55:17. > :55:22.other party in the Commons at the moment that is voting with the
:55:23. > :55:29.unanimity, the single allergy of purpose that the SNP are doing. The
:55:30. > :55:35.people of Scotland will take much the same view as people in the rest
:55:36. > :55:39.of the UK, there is no appetite, no enthusiasm for military action, but
:55:40. > :55:45.I think there is an understanding, we think back to the human response
:55:46. > :55:51.this summer as we saw that stream of refugees fleeing that civil war in
:55:52. > :55:59.Syria. It was a compassionate response which was motivated by a
:56:00. > :56:05.desire to help. If you are to turn away from the opportunity to help
:56:06. > :56:08.when you have it, and it is just an opportunity not guaranteed, if you
:56:09. > :56:13.turn away from that is because it is too difficult and will maybe involve
:56:14. > :56:17.some things that are unpalatable, then frankly I think you cheapen
:56:18. > :56:22.their compassion. The refugees will keep coming until you resolve the
:56:23. > :56:34.situation in Syria. Thank you for joining us.
:56:35. > :56:39.Paul Gilbride is still here. Let us try to unpick, what exactly is this
:56:40. > :56:44.strategy? A military campaign against Isis. This process in Vienna
:56:45. > :56:49.which produces an Agreement that Assad either steps down or will step
:56:50. > :56:55.down. There is traditional authority at which point these 70,000 people
:56:56. > :57:00.say, we do not need to fight the Syrians anymore, we will fight with
:57:01. > :57:08.the west end fighting Isis. They get defeated and that is a new regime in
:57:09. > :57:12.Syria. Is that it? From where we are sitting that appears to be wishful
:57:13. > :57:18.thinking. It does not look credible. But what is the alternative? You
:57:19. > :57:33.have got to start somewhere. With the Syrian crisis there is the
:57:34. > :57:41.schism between Sunnis and Shias. You have got to start somewhere.
:57:42. > :57:47.If there could be some Agreement between Iran and Russia it is not
:57:48. > :57:51.completely pie in the sky, is it? No, that nation States and great
:57:52. > :58:00.powers have got to look at what the interest are. It is in no 1's
:58:01. > :58:07.interest, surely, -- nobody 's interest for an entity like Daesh to
:58:08. > :58:13.remain and perhaps even cruel and influence. Certainly not in the
:58:14. > :58:20.interests of the civilised world. On the politics of this. We have
:58:21. > :58:26.pointed out that Labour are pretty much all over the place on this and
:58:27. > :58:30.it is not looking credible but is the SNP looking anymore credible?
:58:31. > :58:39.This idea that they have 54 MPs, all of whom have spontaneously decided
:58:40. > :58:43.they all agree with one line. If you look at Labour they are
:58:44. > :58:49.almost at one end of the spectrum, the elite disguised chaos. There is
:58:50. > :58:54.a broad Church and there is civil war almost. Then you look at the
:58:55. > :59:02.SNP. We have learnt their lesson well from Tony Blair and new Labour.
:59:03. > :59:08.It is almost like the hive mind. But the politics of the SNP, is this a
:59:09. > :59:14.material change, is it something they can exploit for electoral gain?
:59:15. > :59:22.We'll have to leave it there. That is all for now. Analysis on the
:59:23. > :59:42.vote on Scotland 2015 on BBC Two tonight.