Ministers face sack over Syria Shambles

Ministers face sack over Syria shambles
At least five Government ministers face the sack in the wake of David Cameron’s humiliating failure to secure parliamentary backing for military strikes against the Syrian regime.

Justine Greening, the International Development Secretary, and Ken Clarke, another Cabinet minister. Photo: LEWIS WHYLD/PA
Robert Winnett, Peter Dominiczak and Holly Watt
9:59PM BST 30 Aug 2013
773 Comments
Alan Duncan, David Gauke and Steve Webb failed to return from holiday to support the Government, angering the Prime Minister, according to sources.

Justine Greening, the International Development Secretary, and Mark Simmonds, a junior Foreign Office minister, claim to have not realised that voting had begun as they were in a meeting. Commons officials said the explanation was baffling as it “would have been clear” that a vote was happening.

Kenneth Clarke also abstained after being given permission for “logistical family reasons”, but the 73-year-old minister without portfolio is widely expected to lose his job anyway in a forthcoming reshuffle.

In total, including Liberal Democrats and a Downing Street adviser, 10 members of the Government are recorded as not having voted.

Mr Cameron is expected to announce a series of changes as soon as next week, with the position of Sir George Young, the Chief Whip, also under scrutiny.

Related Articles
Diplomatic language cannot mask the damage David Cameron's defeat has done to the 'special relationship'
30 Aug 2013
Obama: US has obligation as world leader to act in Syria
30 Aug 2013
Kerry: Syria gas attack cannot go unpunished
30 Aug 2013
I want US to attack, says Assad's 'son' on Facebook
30 Aug 2013
John Kerry slaps Britain in face by calling France 'oldest allies'
30 Aug 2013
Former ambassador: US shares our disquiet over Syria
30 Aug 2013

Some senior Conservatives described the circumstances around Thursday night’s vote, which may have implications for Britain’s international reputation and the credibility of Mr Cameron’s leadership, as a “total shambles”.

Today, Mr Cameron said he had sought to do the right thing in seeking the backing of MPs for a motion supporting the principle of military action against the Syrian regime, which was blamed for a chemical weapons attack in Damascus last week. He said he had sought to make the argument in a “strong and principled way”. Mr Cameron lost the parliamentary vote by 13, after 30 Tory rebels voted with Labour. Another 31 Conservatives failed to vote.

Senior Tory sources indicated tonight that the positions of ministers and the Downing Street adviser who did not vote were in jeopardy as recriminations grew over a parliamentary defeat which is unprecedented in modern times.

“The Prime Minister is pretty angry,” said a senior Tory source. “This vote had a three-line whip and no, they didn’t all have permission to miss the vote.”

However, adding to the growing sense of dysfunction within the party, some of the ministers insisted tonight that they were given permission not to vote by whips, who apparently believed that it would not be close.

Mr Gauke, a Treasury minister, said: “I was abroad and given permission not to attend. [I’m] supportive of the Government’s position, obviously. I would have voted [for the Government]. I think it’s a pity that the House voted the way that it has and obviously the Government has to accept Parliament’s opinion in these matters.”

Mr Duncan, a minister for international development, said: “I was unable to get back from abroad so I was given permission to absent myself by the whips. I logistically could not get back in time. I have no further comment.”

A Downing Street source said: “There were a number of MPs who did not attend the Commons vote either for personal reasons or because the logistics were impossible. These arrangements were agreed with the whips’ office.”

The position of Jesse Norman, a Conservative MP who recently became a Downing Street policy adviser, is also thought to be under threat. Mr Norman, who was present during Thursday’s debate, decided to abstain from the vote. He has not commented on his reasons but is said to have had concerns about the proposal. Mr Norman orchestrated the successful rebellion against government plans to reform the Lords.

Several Lib Dem ministerial aides, including Tessa Munt and Lorely Burt, also did not vote, but Nick Clegg is not thought to be angered by their actions.

The failure to win the vote, which meant Britain has had to withdraw an offer of military support to the US, has caused one of the most serious crises of Mr Cameron’s time in office.

Some of his main rivals for the Tory leadership, including Boris Johnson, Theresa May and Philip Hammond, are thought to have long harboured doubts over the wisdom of intervening in Syria. Today, senior Conservative MPs openly attacked Mr Cameron’s strategy. Sir Richard Shepherd said he had not encountered a comparable situation during 34 years in Parliament and that Mr Cameron had been “weakened”.

“I am supposed to be the moderate one here, speaking well of my party in principle, but this is crazy,” he said. “You feel that these are very inexperienced people who are making decisions at the top.”

David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, said Mr Cameron had used a “shaky argument” when he had asked Parliament to “kill people”.

“What he said was that they couldn’t prove it [the case against the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad] outright,” Mr Davis said. “He used the words 'a matter of judgment’ several times, and that’s actually quite a shaky argument when you’re going to kill people.” A spokesman for the Syrian opposition said the vote could encourage Assad to “use chemical weapons again on a much greater scale”.

George Osborne said the vote meant there needed to be “national soul-searching” over Britain’s role in the world and added that the public needed to question “whether Britain wants to play a big part in upholding the international system”.

Lord Ashdown, the former Lib Dem leader, said he felt “ashamed” and “depressed” about the failure of politicians to support action. “Call me an old warhorse if you wish but I think our country is greatly diminished this morning,” he said. “The special relationship with the US is seriously damaged, and Britain is now more isolated.”

Senior Downing Street sources said Mr Cameron had felt compelled to act after seeing pictures of children killed by chemical weapons. The sources insisted that he had a “strong and principled view” and was right to seek parliamentary backing, even if he ultimately failed.

The Prime Minister, who spoke to Barack Obama yesterday afternoon, said: “I was faced with three things I wanted to do right and do in the right way. First of all, to condemn absolutely and respond properly to an appalling war crime that took place in Syria. Secondly, to work with our strongest and most important ally who had made a request for British help. Thirdly, to act as a democrat, to act in a different way to previous prime ministers and properly consult Parliament.”

He added: “I think the American people and President Obama will understand that.” Mr Cameron also he did not believe that Britain’s international standing had been damaged.

However, there is intense Conservative anger at Ed Miliband, who is privately considered to have acted dishonourably during the course of meetings this week with Mr Cameron. Labour denies the charge strongly and Mr Miliband said yesterday that he had acted in the “national interest”.