Local MPs have expressed their views ahead of the crucial IS airstrikes vote tomorrow.
They spoke before the start of the debate in the House of Commons which will precede the MPs’ vote on whether to support a Government motion to authorise air strikes against IS in Syria.
In the parliamentary motion, five cabinet members including David Cameron have asked on behalf of the Government for support to engage in airstrikes “exclusively against Isil in Syria” to prevent terrorist acts as “part of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria.”
Other aims in the motion include commitments to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees, planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction, continuing to try cut “Isil’s sources of finance, fighters and weapons” and “seeking to avoid civilian casualties” but “not deploying UK troops in ground combat operations.”
Barry Sheerman, Huddersfield, Labour
The MP said: “To my shame I voted for action in Iraq and will have to be very much persuaded to vote for another war.
“I will listen to the debate to see if there’s a plan that will rebuild the region and Syria but from what I’ve heard so far it’s not part of an integrated response.
“When people talk about bombing as an easy solution I look back to the time I spend in shelters trying to avoid bombing raids.
“IS is ghastly but they are very clever and have the ability to blend into the background.
“We should try to create a multinational force of troops with the blessing of the UN.”
Jason McCartney, Colne Valley, Conservative
Mr McCartney was non-committal: “I’m thinking very deeply about this and I’m going to study the motion and listen to the debate.
“But the whole debate has become really unpleasant.”
Paula Sherriff, Dewsbury, Labour
She said: “I will definitely be voting against the airstrikes. I saw David Cameron set out his case last Thursday but left with more questions than answers.
“I don’t think we should do nothing but evidence suggests that air strikes will only make the situation worse for both us and Syrian civilian casualties.
“We have to explore other options, including how to stop ISIS making $1.5m a day from oil sales.”
Craig Whittaker, Calder Valley, Conservative
He said: “I believe that we are now dealing with the consequences of our inaction two years ago.
“For those who say that military action will see retaliation on British shores we have to acknowledge that we are already a primary target for terrorists.
“I don’t accept the argument that getting involved militarily will replace diplomacy and negotiations.
“We have been involved in that process for over four years and that rightly will continue.
“We should take the decision to extend British airstrikes against Daesh (IS) as an integral part of our comprehensive strategy to degrade Daesh and reduce the threat it poses to us.”
Jo Cox, Batley and Spen, Labour
Ms Cox was not available for comment but recently wrote an opinion piece for the Mirror.
In it, she said: “We cannot stand aside while ISIS grows...and we cannot ignore innocent Syrians being massacred by an evil regime.
But, she added: “I don’t think we can tackle ISIS without also dealing with the threat posed by Assad.”
She asked for a clarification on how the government strategy would help “address Assad’s slaughter of his own civilians.”
