Iraq — UN Security Council Resolution 1441 — Second resolution necessary — rejected — 25 Nov 2002 at 21:34
Mr Simon Burns MP, West Chelmsford voted with the majority (No).
The majority of MPs voted against adding the conditions:
- This House
- believes that any decision that Iraq is in material breach of Resolution 1441 is for the UN Security Council as a whole to determine and that no military action to enforce Resolution 1441 should be taken against Iraq without a mandate from the UN Security Council; and
- further believes that no British forces should be committed to any such military action against Iraq without a debate in this House and a substantive motion in favour.
to the end of the motion for debate, which read:
- This House -
- supports United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 as unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council;
- agrees that the Government of Iraq must comply fully with all provisions of the Resolution; and
- agrees that, if it fails to do so, the Security Council should meet in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance.
As it turned out, the second extra condition requiring a further debate in the House was satisfied, while the first concerning a Security Council mandate was not.
-  Michael Moore MP speech, House of Commons, 25 November 2002
-  Jack Straw MP speech, House of Commons, 25 November 2002
-  Iraq - Mandate for invasion, House of Commons Division, 18 March 2003
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Lab||313 (+2 tell)||30||1||84.4%|
|LDem||0||43 (+2 tell)||0||84.9%|