| Mr. Robert Marshall-Andrews
(Medway): May I ask my right hon. Friend for a clear statement of principle and
intent? If the weapons inspectors report that Iraq is reasonably and fully complying and
co-operating with them, and if, as a result of that compliance, matter is found that
indicates that the original declaration was misleading, false or—to use the topical
term—dodgy, would that be regarded as legitimising war? Mr. Straw: I will send my hon.
and learned Friend a copy of resolution 1441. The test for a further material breach is
clearly laid out in operational paragraph 4, and we are subscribing to that.
If military action "should only ever be a last resort" as
Jack Straw also stated in the debate, then he should have been able to provide a direct
answer to the question put by Bob Marshall Andrews.
Alan Simpson went on to ask the following:
Alan Simpson (Nottingham, South): I am genuinely
saddened at the answer—or non-answer—given to my hon. and learned Friend the
Member for Medway (Mr. Marshall-Andrews), because it will only serve to reinforce the
public presumption that the Government are seeking a pretext for a war on Iraq, rather
than the avoidance of one. I want to ask the Secretary of State a specific question about
chemical and biological weapons. On 5 February, in a testimony before the House Armed
Services Committee, Secretary Rumsfeld made it clear that America has plans to use what he
referred to as "non-lethal" biochemical weapons on Iraqi society. Will the
Secretary of State confirm what was admitted in that testimony, and that such weapons are
illegal under the chemical and biological weapons conventions? Will he also confirm that
the current UK policy is for UK troops not to be involved in any operations involving the
use of such weapons? If that is not the case, will he explain why it would be acceptable
for such weapons of mass destruction to be used on Iraqi society, if it is unacceptable
for them to by used by Iraqi society?
Mr. Straw: I think
that my hon. Friend is talking about CS spray, which our own police use.
The dismissive attitude to Alan's question was very worrying.
We are not talking here about CS gas but something more akin to the agent that was used to
end the siege at the Moscow theatre when it was stormed and taken over by Chechen
rebels in October 2002. Earlier this week I attempted to put down a Parliamentary
question (which must be factual, not argumentative) on this issue but the wording has been
rejected by the House of Commons Table Office where MPs submit questions. After
re-wording, yesterday, I asked the Secretary of State for Defence: "what his policy
is on the use by HM Armed Forces of biological and chemical weapons in future
conflicts". To look up answers to questions go to www.polis.parliament.uk. I put
down my original question after reading of the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld's
testimony on 5 February before the House Armed Services Committee, which made it clear
that the US has plans to use "non-lethal" biochemical weapons on Iraqi people.
A good source of information about America's WMD is www.basicint.org
Two Early Day Motions on Iraq with cross party support were put down
this week, text below, both of which I have signed. To look up the signatories go to
the EDM Database. |