DAVID Cameron will today decide on whether or not to bow to pressure from MPs to recall Westminster as their suspicions grow that he is poised to sanction military attacks against Syria.
The Prime Minister, who has cut short his family holiday in Cornwall, has been discussing possible options, including military ones such limited air strikes, with fellow world leaders, and will tomorrow chair Whitehall's National Security Council(NSC). No 10 made clear he reserved the right to take "swift action" if need be.
Nick Clegg has cancelled a trip to Afghanistan to remain in London to attend the NSC. A spokesman for the Deputy Prime Minister said he supported the need for a "strong response" from the international community to the "abhorrent" use of chemical weapons.
MPs from across the parties are demanding a quick recall of the Commons; they are not due to return from the summer recess until Monday. A parliamentary motion is being circulated around backbenchers, demanding a recall and an assurance no action will be taken against the Assad regime before a full Commons debate.
If parliament is recalled, some MPs will be pressing for a swift vote on military action, a vote the Coalition would not be guaranteed to win.
Tory backbencher Andrew Bridgen, who earlier this year sent a letter signed by more than 80 of his Conservative colleagues demanding a vote on any escalation of Britain's involvement in Syria, said: "We need an immediate recall of Parliament to debate any further involvement in this crisis. It's a complicated conflict with potentially worldwide ramifications."
The Leicestershire MP added: "If the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary come to the Despatch Box, they need to convince the House of the need for actions they are considering. That's surely how a democracy works."
Angus Robertson, the SNP's Foreign Affairs spokesman, agreed, saying: "The UK Parliament must be updated on developments and consulted on a potential international military intervention."
He pointed out how the UK Government had pledged to seek MPs' approval to arm the rebels, "so it would be unthinkable to not consult Parliament on the prospect of military intervention".
Labour's Thomas Docherty, MP for Dunfermline and West Fife, insisted no military action should be undertaken without Parliament first having had its say.
"There is no reason why Parliament could not talk about the principle of military action, whether that be air strikes or missile strikes or even, in the worst-case scenario, putting British combat troops on the ground.
"It would be absolutely unforgivable if the Government did not recall Parliament if it was considering any of those three options," he added.
Tory MP Sarah Wollaston, echoing calls for MPs to have their say, noted: "I sense we are on a headlong rush into escalating this conflict and Parliament can act as a natural brake to that."
William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said he was "very conscious" of the need to consult the UK Parliament but added that it would "depend on the timing and nature of what we propose to do".
Meantime, Nigel Farage, the UK Independence Party leader, came out strongly against any British intervention, saying: "We must not engage in military attacks or send British troops to yet another foreign conflict on the whim of William Hague."
He added: "It is not for us to act as world policemen, particularly when there is still the question of who the rebels actually are. We've already seen links to extremists in their ranks.
"We cannot risk training soldiers and providing arms when they may be used against British troops and even civilians in the future."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article