May set to face severe grilling in Commons over Syrian air strikes
THERESA May is braced for a Commons showdown after bowing to pressure and allowing a debate in parliament on the UK’s role in air strikes against the Syrian regime.
She will make a statement on the British, French and US operation that saw more than 100 missiles fired at Syria, before being grilled by MPs who were denied a vote ahead of the action.
Ministers hope the six-hour emergency debate will pacify concerns that parliament is being sidelined, but are desperate to avoid allowing any substantive vote that risks stripping the operation of legitimacy.
It sets the stage for an opposition-party drive to force a more meaningful retrospective vote on Saturday’s action, with Conservative MPs given strict orders to be available for voting today and tomorrow.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn went even further yesterday and demanded a new ‘War Powers Act’ that would see all future prime ministers requiring MPs’ approval before taking almost any military action.
In her statement to parliament today, Mrs May will try and flesh out the legal and moral case for her decision to send British fighter jets into action, arguing that she sought to alleviate further humanitarian suffering.
She will highlight the operation’s broad international backing, claim it was in the national interest and criticise Russia for manoeuvres at the UN to block investigations into the Douma chemical weapons incident that galvanised the West to act.
Mrs May will say: “We are confident in our own assessment that the Syrian regime was highly likely responsible for this attack and that its persistent pattern of behaviour meant that it was highly likely to continue using chemical weapons.”
Linking the attack to the UK’s broader stand-off with Russia over the Salisbury nerve agent poisoning, she will add: “It is in our national interest to prevent the further use of chemical
weapons in Syria and to uphold and defend the global consensus that these weapons should not be used.
“For we cannot allow the use of chemical weapons to become normalised, either in Syria, on UK streets or elsewhere.”
Her emphasis on the national interest may also speak to polls showing minimal public support for the Syria strikes.
The Prime Minister said by convention it was her “prerogative” to take military action without parliamentary approval. But with pressure growing she ap-
pears to have judged it wise to allow MPs to sound off.
The emergency debate has been called under procedures laid out under House of Commons Standing Order 24, which allows for a general debate.
While it will give MPs the chance to air their views and make prolonged criticism of the government, it will only be accompanied by a neutral motion, such as “that the House has considered the matter of military action taken on April 14”.
It means that even if opposition MPs demand a vote on the motion, it will not necessarily affect the legitimacy of the air strikes if the government loses.
It is understood that opposition parties are considering pushing it to a vote anyway, simply to make the point that some sort of vote should be held.
Labour and other parties may also tr y and force their own emergency debates tomorrow that could carry with them more substantive motions on whether the Commons should back the strikes, which if lost would create serious problems for the prime minister’s credibility.