§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 24, to debate an important matter that requires specific and urgent consideration, namely,
the statement of the Iraqi Foreign Minister at the weekend about weapons inspectors.This is against the background of much concern in the United States, not least from the American conference of Roman Catholic bishops who urged the President and members of Congress to step back from the brink of war and to work with other nations and the United Nations actively to pursue effective alternatives to war to address Iraq's threats.There are a number of questions that the House of Commons must address urgently.
First, will Britain be, in a legal sense, in a state of war with Iraq if we join the US attack?
Secondly, why did President Bush have to get a vote in Congress authorising the use of force, when the British Government have not indicated their intention of doing so?
Thirdly, if British forces are engaged, will that be done under the royal prerogative, which requires no parliamentary authority?
Fourthly, what will be the position of British citizens now living and working in Iraq? Will they be advised to leave the country before the attack or to stay and, if so, what protection can the Government give them?
Fifthly, will British troops, if they are captured, be entitled to protection under the Geneva convention?
Sixthly, will British troops be under the orders of American officers and will they be required to serve in an army of occupation?
Seventhly, will the British Government be consulted on the date when hostilities begin and will they be a signatory of any agreement to bring the war to an end?
Eighthly, what compensation will the British Government give British citizens who suffer financial loss as a result of war?
Ninthly, will Iraqi citizens living in Britain be treated as enemy aliens and imprisoned, and under what statutory authority?
684 Tenthly, what rights will Iraqi soldiers captured by British forces have, and will they qualify for the protection of the Geneva convention?
Eleventhly, what will be the position, under military law, of members of the British armed forces who refuse to fight because they believe that a war waged against Iraq that has not been authorised by the United Nations could lead to their being charged at a war crimes tribunal under the International Criminal Court, which the British Government support?
Twelfthly, how would the position of British troops charged with war crimes differ from that of American troops, given that the United States has declared itself exempt from any international criminal court?
Thirteenthly, how would the British Government respond to a charge of war crimes of the kind brought under the Nuremberg court?
Fourteenthly, have the Law Officers been consulted on these issues and will their report be published and laid before Parliament?
In no way am I anti-American. I share a great great-grandmother with one of the American Presidents. I have many American friends, as do many people in the House. We are not anti-American, but we think that these questions should be urgently addressed.
§ Mr. SpeakerI have listened carefully to what the hon. Gentleman said and I have to give him my decision without stating any reasons. I am afraid that I do not consider that the matter that he has raised is appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 24 and I cannot, therefore, submit the application to the House.
§ Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Many of us are deeply concerned about the latest threats from Colin Powell and believe that they are evidence of the further intention and determination of the United States to start that sort of war. We think that it is time for the fancy footwork from those on our Front Bench to stop and for us to have a firm statement about exactly what our policy is on Iraq. I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, as the protector of Back-Bench rights, to urge the Government at least to make a statement to the House.
§ Mr. SpeakerMinisters will have heard what the hon. Lady has said.