The best speeches from the Syria airstrikes debate

Welcome to Coffee House’s coverage of the Syria debate in the House of Commons yesterday. Here are the best speeches in favour of and against the motion, with full quotes and audio clips. 10:15pm: The foreign secretary Philip Hammond has closed the debate on behalf of the government, making the case for the airstrikes: 9:45pm: Shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn has delivered a rousing speech in favour of the airstrikes that received huge applause from both sides of the Commons. There was a standing ovation for Benn, led by former Tory Cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell from Tory backbenches. Quite extraordinary. 9:10pm: former Director of Public Prosecutions Sir Keir Starmer has said he is voting against airstrikes, although he explains that UN resolution 2249 would be a lawful basis for action:

‘The question for me is whether, if lawful, the action is none-the-less compelling and coherent. The argument that there’s no logic taking military action in Iraq but not in Syria is seductive and powerful, but in the end it’s unconvincing. The situation in Syria is very different to the situation in Iraq.’

8:50pm: the former shadow chief secretary to the treasury, Shabana Mahmood, explains why she is voting against the airstrikes — after backing military action Libya and Iraq, but not Syria in the last parliament:

‘We can all agree that Isil are not representative of our faith and they are not representative of Sunni Muslims. They are Nazi-esque totalitarians who are outlaws from Islam, who engage in indiscriminate slaughter and who murder any Muslim that doesn’t agree with them. If you’re different or you disagree, you die and in Isil, I am well aware that a Muslim like myself would be killed. ‘So believe me when I say that I do not just what to see Isil defeated, I want to see them eradicated. But I believe that the action will proposed will not work and that is why I can not vote for it.’

8:44pm: Dr Tania Mathias, the Conservative MP who was previously an aid worker with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, explained why she’ll be voting in favour of the airstrikes:

‘Over ten years ago, I marched with a million other people against the war. Today I do believe this is different, there is a United Nations resolution, there are Arab countries that will align with us. When I go through the ayes lobby, it will be for the refugees and it will be for the security in Twickenham’.

8:35pm: Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin has also spoken on behalf of the airstrikes, arguing that the Commons debate is trying to address two different issues:

‘We’re grappling with, on the one hand, what is actually no more than a minor tactical correction in the conduct of the air war against Isis and on the other hand, we’re trying to assess and judge an overall strategic plan which is being formulated by amongst a rather disparate and disunited coalition — which is necessarily chaotic and fluid and bound to change.’

6:50pm: Former solider and Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat has given an impassioned defence of the airstrikes, describing David Cameron’s case as ‘right, honourable and true’:

‘This twisted perversion of Islam that is to Islam what fascism is to nationalism, that is to Islam what communism is to socialism. This vile Stalinist death cult, this dreadful regime must, I’m sorry to say, be stopped. And sadly the only way to stop it is not through talks, these are a people, this a group that does not wish to speak to us. They have defined us clearly in their theology as infidels’.

5.50pm John Woodcock, Labour and Co-operative MP for Barrow and Furness, has chastised some members of the party for their behaviour in recent days. ‘I think that some of the people on the front bench now, and the people heckling behind me, need to think very carefully about the way in which they have conducted themselves over recent weeks,’ he said. 5.45pm The former foreign secretary William Hague, in his maiden speech to the House of Lords, where they are also debating Syria, has said that it could be necessary to deploy ground troops. He said we ‘should not rule out the use, perhaps, of small specialist ground forces in the future, from western nations, if that helps to tip the balance on the grounds.’ 5.40pm Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP for Chichester, has called the government’s plan ‘folly’ and has said that acting in reflex is not enough to justify intervention in Syria. 5.00pm: Ed Miliband, the former leader of the Labour party, has tweeted to say that he is opposing the motion:

I will be opposing the government motion on Syria tonight. My statement to to my constituency explains why.https://t.co/xjrf8Zc1vj
— Ed Miliband (@Ed_Miliband) December 2, 2015

The decision to oppose the motion was finely balanced. Good friends and colleagues who I deeply respect will be supporting the motion.
— Ed Miliband (@Ed_Miliband) December 2, 2015

4.40pm: Caroline Lucas, the only Green MP in the house, has said that a bombing campaign would only ‘make matters worse’. She also suggested that places like Mosul are also bristling with Isis members and that ‘if you wanted to get rid of Isis in Mosul, you would literally have to flatten the entire city’. 4.20pm: Dan Jarvis, Labour MP for Barnsley Central and a former British Army Major, has said that as Isis do not recognise any borders between Syria and Iraq, neither should we. He said that we must come to our allies’ assistance, and asked: ‘if we ignore these calls today, when will we answer them in the future?’ 4.00pm: Alex Salmond, the SNP’s foreign affairs spokesperson, has said we need an ‘overall strategy’, which is lacking at the moment – and has disputed the suggestion that a bombing campaign won’t lead to civilian casualties. He also argued that the institutions that support Isis need to be tackled before any bombing campaign is approved, but that he has seen little evidence of this. Salmond, of course, has long form in opposing military action. He described the Kosovo bombing campaign as ‘unpardonable folly’. 3.40pm: David Davis, Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden, says that we should ‘never believe we can cut off the head of the snake’ because it’s the ‘wrong metaphor’, and that it’s unclear what difference Britain’s involvement can make. He also suggests Turkey – as a Nato member – should shut its border with Syria. 3.20pm: Tim Farron, leader of the Lib Dems, says this is the hardest decision he’s had to make – possibly ever, certainly in Parliament – but that the UN resolution has convinced him we should ‘stand as part of the international community of nations…to degrade and to defeat this evil death cult.’ 3:10pm: The DUP’s Westminster leader Nigel Dodds says he is supporting the airstrikes in Syria, based on his party’s experiences in Northern Ireland:

‘Our test on these benches has been one of realism. Our experience in Northern Ireland has taught us that no other approach can be brought to bear when you’re facing terrorism. It must be fought and it must be fought with all the means realistically at our disposal. We have not sought this conflict – terrorists have inflicted it upon us but we must now respond.’

3:00pm: The former shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper has also spoken in favour of the airstrikes, noting ‘I do not believe that the PM has made the most effective case’:

‘If France has asked for our help, I do not think we can say no, so I think there are changes that need to made to the government’s approach and I will argue for them…I will vote with the Government on this motion tonight, even though I recognise how difficult that is for so many of us.’

2:45pm: Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson has thanked the shadow cabinet for the opportunity of a free vote but says he will be voting for the airstrikes:

‘I believe Isis/Daesh poses a real and present danger to British citizens and that its dedicated external operations unit is based not in Iraq, where the RAFis already fully engaged, but in Syria. This external operations unit is responsible for killing 30 British holidaymakers on a beach in Sousse and a British rock fan who perished along with 129 others in the Paris atrocity a few weeks ago.’

2:30pm: John Baron, a Conservative member of the Foreign Affairs select committee, says he is no a pacifist but he is opposing the airstrikes:

‘The short-term effect of British airstrikes will be marginal. But as we intervene more, we become more responsible for the events on the ground and lay ourselves open to the unintended consequences of the fog of war. Without a comprehensive strategy, airstrikes will simply reinforce the west’s long-term failure in the region generally, at a time when there are already too many aircraft chasing too few targets.’

2:19pm: Former foreign secretary Margaret Beckett has given a powerful speech in favour of the strikes:

‘There are those not opposed in principle to action who doubt the efficacy of what is proposed — a coalition action which rests wholly on bombing they say will have little effect. Well, tell that to the Kosovans and don’t forget, if there had been no bombing in Kosovo perhaps a million Albanian Muslim refugees would have been seeking refuge in Europe.’

2:10pm: Chair of the Foreign Affairs select committee Crispin Blunt has explained why he is now backing the government on airstrikes:

‘This House will best discharge its responsibilities by giving our Government the authority it needs not just to act with our international partners against this horror, but to influence them’.

2:00pm: The Father of the House Sir Gerald Kaufman has spoken against the airstrikes because ‘I am not going to be a party to the killing innocent civilians for what will simply be a gesture’: 1:50pm: Former defence secretary Liam Fox has spoken in favour of airstrikes, arguing that ‘no conflict is ever won from the air alone’ but Isis is a particularly brutal enemy:

‘We should be under no illusions about the nature of the threat we face. This is not like some of the armed political terrorists we have seen in the past. This is a fundamentally different threat. This is a group that does not seek accommodation. They seek domination.

1:45pm: SNP’s Westminster leader Angus Robertson has also spoken in opposition to the government’s motion, arguing ‘there is no shortage of countries currently bombing in Syria’: ‘I was a co-sponsor of the 2003 amendment to oppose invading Iraq and I am proud to sponsor today’s amendment opposing bombing in Syria. I appeal to colleagues on all sides to learn the lessons from Afghanistan, not to ignore the lessons of Iraq, not to ignore the lessons of Libya. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. Let’s not give the green light to military action without a comprehensive and credible plan to win the peace.’ 1:13pm: Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has opened the debate on behalf of the opposition to the government’s motion. He focused on the Prime Minister’s ‘terrorist sympathisers’ remark:

‘For all members, taking a decision that will put British servicemen and women in harm’s way and almost inevitably lead to the deaths of innocents is a heavy responsibility. ‘It must be treated with the utmost seriousness – and respect given to those who make a different judgment about the right course of action to take. ‘Which is why the prime minister’s attempt to brand those who plan to vote against the government as ‘terrorist sympathisers’ both demeans the office of the prime minister and undermines the seriousness of the deliberations we are having today.’

12:50pm: During Cameron’s statement, Rehman Chishti, the Conservative MP for Gillingham and Rainham, asked the Prime Minister how Isis should be referred to:

Rehman Chishti: Will the Prime Minister join me in urging the BBC to review their bizarre policy; when they wrote to me to say that they can’t use the word Daesh because it would breach their impartiality rules? We are at war with terrorists, Prime Minister. We have to defeat their ideology, their appeal. We have to be united in that. Will he join me now in urging the BBC to review their bizarre policy? David Cameron: I agree with my honourable friend I’ve already corresponded with the BBC about their use of IS—Islamic State—which I think is even worse, frankly, than either saying ‘so-called IS’, or indeed ‘Isil’. But Daesh is clearly an improvement and I think it is important we all try and use this language.’

12:30pm: David Cameron has opened the debate by calling for respect for those who disagree with the government’s stance on airstrikes:

‘The question before the House today is how we keep the British people safe from the threat posed by Isil and, Mr Speaker, let me be clear from the outset this is not about whether we fight terrorism, it’s about how best we do that. ‘Governments of all political colours in this country have had to fight terrorism and had to take the people with them as they do so and I respect people who’ve come to a different view from the government and the one I’ve set out today and those who vote accordingly. And I hope that provides some reassurance to members right across the house.’

11:30am: The debate on the government’s motion (read here) on intervention in Syria has started, with David Cameron making the case for airstrikes on behalf of the government. Here are some pieces to get you up to speed: