Oral question asked in the House of Commons, by Graham Allen (Labour). It was answered on Monday, 8 January 2007 on behalf of the Leader of the House of Commons.

Wars: Parliamentary Approval

Question: The Leader of the House knows that since the beginning of the Iraq war, members of parties in all parts of the House have signed Remaining Orders which highlight the difficult situation facing any Government in consulting any legislature in any democracy about going to war.Will he take it from me that many of us appreciate the thought that he is giving to the matter, and that there must be some sort of formal settlement - some sort of procedure - which involves the Executive having the flexibility and the nimbleness to respond to aggression whenever necessary, and which recognises the needs of a democracy to ensure that a legislature can at least endorse that very important decision to take a country to war?

Answer: In return, I thank my hon. Friend for the seriousness and care that he is taking on the matter. When I used that phrase, I was in many respects echoing the words of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister before the Liaison Committee in early February last year, when he said: ““The fact of the matter is that I cannot conceive of a situation in which a Government”” would ““go to war . . . without a full parliamentary debate.”” That is in practice the convention that we have established. The issue remains whether that convention should be formalised or should be left, as many conventions are, as conventions.

Secondary information

Type: Oral question
Reference: 455 c19
Session: 2006-07
Oral question type: 1st Supplementary
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Armed conflict Iraq Parliamentary procedure Parliamentary scrutiny