Proceeding contribution from Patrick Mercer (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 23 May 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Iran (External Involvement).
Iran (External Involvement)
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s intervention. The messages that this country sent out were extraordinary. We sent the extremely powerful message that at the end of a dirty, lethal and extremely unpopular campaign, a member of the royal family was willing to risk his neck alongside the humblest private soldier or trooper from his regiment. The fact that that was then rescinded and that we went public on the decision-making process was a disgrace, and I find it extremely difficult to understand how, yet again, we fell into a well-organised and sophisticated public relations ambush. I hope that that answer proves helpful. Why do we send delegations to Iran? Why do we treat Iran as if she is a friendly nation? We are content to stand up to nations such as Belarus; we do not send delegations there or receive its delegations. To underline the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, North (Mr. Scott), why do we continue to be ambivalent with Iran about her human right records? Why do we tolerate the way in which gender issues are handled inside Iran? How can we begin to understand some of the EU’s statements about the MEK or People’s Mujaheddin of Iran—a point recently made by the hon. Member for Thurrock (Andrew Mackinlay)? However one regards that organisation, we must deal with it even-handedly. The EU3 stated in November 2004 that if Iran were to comply with the demands of the EU and pull back from its apparent development of nuclear weapons,"““we would continue to regard the MEK””" —that is, the PMOI—"““as a terrorist organisation.””" What is the PMOI? Is it a terrorist organisation or not? Can it be used as a pawn on this particular board? Do we treat the people involved as human beings? Why do we proscribe that organisation, whereas Hizb ut-Tahrir continues to be non-proscribed more than 18 months after the Prime Minister said that he would proscribe it? There is a terrible inconsistency, and I hope that the Minister will make it clear how he and the Government intend to deal with it.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 460 c432-3WH
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Armed forces Armed conflict Arms trade Iraq Foreign relations Terrorism Weapons Afghanistan Iran
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:03:55 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399582
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399582
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399582