Plans to allow MPs a veto over proposed military action were in doubt today amid warnings such a proposal could compromise Britain's security.
An armed man in Benghazi, Libya. Mr Hague made the promise before MPs voted to support military action in the country. Photo: AFP/GettyImages
By Telegraph Reporters
8:00AM GMT 04 Jan 2013
William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, has committed the Coalition to a new law that would force governments to go to the House of Commons before sending the Armed Forces into battle.
But Whitehall officials have struggled to draw up a Bill that would give ultimate authority to MPs while simultaneously allowing ministers a chance to respond to an emergency, the Times reported today.
It came as former generals urged Mr Hague to abandon the promise, warning it would remove an element of surprise for Armed Forces and could compromise intelligence.
Mr Hague made the promise in 2011 just before MPs voted to support military action in Libya. David Cameron's decision to seek parliamentary approval followed an example set by Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, before the Iraq war in 2003.
Related Articles
_ Army losing key staff under voluntary redundancies - 08 Jan 2013
_ Britain takes up G8 presidency - 01 Jan 2013
_ Sarkozy 'paid £40m by Gaddafi' - 03 Jan 2013
_ Barack Obama admits 'huge problem' in Benghazi consulate security - 30 Dec 2012
_ Middle East review of 2012: the Arab Winter - 31 Dec 2012
_ As Basra's economy promises to boom, Britain's consulate prepares to pull out. - 29 Dec 2012
Mr Hague told MPs that the Government would "enshrine in law for the future the necessity of consulting Parliament on military action". There is currently no such requirement.
But officials in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Ministry of Defence and Cabinet Office are "going through a whole range of hypothetical scenarios" about how such a law might tie the hands of ministers, well-placed officials told the Times.
"If you discovered that a rogue state was about to attack, would you recall the House?" one official told the newspaper.
"Or if a busload of British tourists was being held hostage, would you have to have Parliament meet to decide what to do? People are working through that detail. It's making progress but it's complex."
Minister has changed the Cabinet Manual to state that the Government would seek to consult the Commons "except when there was an emergency and such action would not be appropriate", it was claimed.
A Bill would need to be in the Queen's Speech this spring to be guaranteed a chance of reaching the statute book before the next election.
Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, the former Chief of the Defence Staff, told The Times: "In an ideal world it would be nice to have a debate in Parliament saying that Parliament approves a war.
“But we don't live in an ideal world. It would be crazy to codify it, very dangerous indeed.”
Lord Wallace of Saltaire, who speaks for the Government on defence issues in the Lords, made no commitment to legislate when answering a parliamentary question before Christmas.
"This Government has stated clearly that it will observe the existing convention that before UK troops are committed to conflict, the House of Commons should have the opportunity to debate and vote on the matter," he said in response to Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield, a constitutional historian.
"There are a number of important questions of detail that need to be addressed in the options for the formalisation of this convention. These are under consideration."
Lord Hennessy replied: "It may be that the coalition is exhausted at the prospect of constitutional reform given the ruins of the AV referendum and the wreckage of House of Lords reform.
“But a decision about war and peace is the highest that comes before Parliament and it would be good if the coalition could signal their intentions on this matter."
The Conservatives' 2010 manifesto included a pledge to make them "subject to greater democratic control so that Parliament is properly involved in all big national decisions".
Despite the Liberal Democrats being in favour or reform – a pledge on war-making powers was not included in the coalition agreement.
A Foreign Office spokesman said today: "“The Foreign Secretary has always been a strong supporter of a clear role of Parliament in such decisions.
“There is an established convention that Parliament should have an opportunity to debate the commitment of UK forces to military action in advance, unless an emergency means this would not be appropriate.
"We have made clear to Parliament our commitment to observing this convention, and since the debate on Libya have formally set this out in the 2011 Cabinet Manual."
“Enshrining in law isn’t a simple matter - and would, under any circumstances, need to be done in such a way that does not prevent emergency action to defend the UK in the case of attack or to undermine the safety of HM armed forces.”
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog".
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
10012013
___________
Cộng sản Việt Nam là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment