Iraq — Weapons of Mass Destruction — 24 Sep 2002 at 21:45
The majority of MPs voted technically against the House of Commons adjourning. This this vote was in the context of a debate on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and some have interpreted those voting "no" with the majority of MPs as voting against military action in Iraq.
The motion was "That the House do now adjourn," which is a procedural motion to allow a debate on an open issue.
The issue was the publication of the long-awaited Iraq's weapons of mass destruction dossier, for which Parliament had been recalled.
There was no vote planned, but some MPs held a vote anyway (voting for the House not to adjourn), after which the Speaker said:
- Order. I have a statement to make. That vote has served its intended purpose, demonstrating the strength of feeling in some quarters of the House on this difficult issue, but because of the rules of the House it does not have any procedural effect. As it is now past 10 o'clock, the debate on Iraq has concluded. It is now the duty of the Government Whip to move formally that this House do now adjourn to bring the sitting to a conclusion, and I must put the Question forthwith.
During the debate Mrs Alice Mahon MP (Halifax, Labour) explained why she was voting saying:[1]
- The only option for those who want to show our disgust that we might be dragged down this route to war is to vote against the motion on the Adjournment tonight. The public are expecting that. It is a betrayal of public trust that we have not been given a vote.
==
All Votes Cast - sorted by constituency
MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party are marked in red. Also shows which MPs were ministers at the time of this vote. You can also see every eligible MP including those who did not vote in this division.
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote