UK Parliament / Open data

Iraq: Future Strategic Relationship

Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 14 January 2009. It occurred during Debate on Iraq: Future Strategic Relationship.
We made it clear that the reason for going to war—rightly, in my view—was Saddam Hussein's failure to comply with resolution 1441 and to provide reassurances about weapons of mass destruction. He did not give the reassurances, and that is why we went to war. Nevertheless, I believe that our entering into that conflict means that Iraq is a better place for his passing. The hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey), who leads for the Liberal Democrats, said that he and his party were so concerned about the invasion of Iraq that they voted against it. That is correct. I believed that the Liberal Democrats were wrong at the time and I still hold that view today. He was then intervened on by the hon. Member for Woodspring, who leads for the Opposition, who asked an interesting question, which the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton ducked. The hon. Gentleman who leads for the Opposition asked him whether he felt that Iraq and Iraqis were better off now that Saddam Hussein was gone. His response was to quote an opinion poll giving the feelings of Iraqis about coalition forces. He knows—and the House knows—that that is a very different issue. The reality is that the vast majority of Iraqis feel that they are better off.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
486 c309-10 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top