Proceeding contribution from Liam Fox (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 May 2005. It occurred during Queen's speech debate on Foreign Affairs and Defence.
Foreign Affairs and Defence
I share my hon. Friend’s reservations. That appointment was typical of the Prime Minister, who, in a spirit of contrition, stood at the steps of Downing street and told us how much he had learned, and then immediately started reappointing cronies to top Government posts. That was the extent of the humility that we will see in the Government’s third term. It is a great shame that the Commonwealth has been consigned to the periphery of our foreign policy. It is one of the most valuable resources for exerting our influence, yet the Government regard it with disdain. I sometimes think that Britain does not deserve the Commonwealth. The French or the Germans would give their right hands to be at the centre of an organisation with such political and economic potential. So much could be done, but so little is attempted by the Government. Whether it is limited vision, lack of ambition or some sort of post-colonial guilt syndrome, it is impossible to say, but it is certainly a wasted opportunity. From India, with its massive potential for growth, or Sri Lanka, where I had the honour to play a small part in the peace process, to the powerhouse that is Australia, so much could be achieved, yet so little is attempted. The one area in which the Government have been only too ready to become engaged is Iraq. I do not intend to go over whether or not the Attorney-General gave inconsistent advice on the legality of the war. Nor do I intend to rehearse the familiar arguments about whether the country was misled about Iraq’s ultimately non-existent weapons of mass destruction. But what is clear is this: if Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein’s regime was certainly intent on getting them. Iraq was in clear breach of its international obligations. The security of neighbouring nations and the stability of the region as a whole was put at risk by those developments. I make those points not because of their relevance to Iraq, but because of their relevance to Iran. Just what are the parallels between Iraq and Iran? There is widespread public anxiety that the decision to undertake military action in Iraq was taken long before we in the House of Commons voted for it. So what is the Government’s plan of action for Iran? The approach of the three European Governments, however well meant, does not seem to be reaping rewards. If the Security Council comes next, what sanctions do we envisage and in what time scale? Transparency on the issue from the outset is vital if we are to maintain public confidence. Trust will be harder to come by second time around.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 434 c168
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Armed forces Defence Constitutions European Union Iraq European Constitution Treaty Foreign policy Referendums Zimbabwe Middle East
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 23:02:38 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_248350
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_248350
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_248350