Iraq — Attorney-General's Advice — 9 Mar 2004 at 17:19
The majority of MPs voted against the publication of the Attorney-General's advice on the legality of the war in Iraq.
The majority of MPs voted to reject the motion:
- This House believes that all advice prepared by the Attorney-General on the legality of the war in Iraq should be published in full.
The new motion in its place passed without a vote:
- This House
- notes the long-standing convention, followed by successive governments, that the advice of the Law Officers is given in confidence and is not disclosed publicly;
- notes, however, the Answer given in the House of Lords by the Attorney General on 17th March 2003 which set out his view of the legal basis of the use of force against Iraq, and the letter of the same date from the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee giving more detail of the legal position; and
- believes that the priority now for the Government is to help the Iraqi people rebuild Iraq.
The publication of the advice can be seen as enabling an effective, public, inquiry into the war.
-  Lord Goldsmith, House of Lords, 17 March 2003.
-  Legal quest to see Iraq advice, BBC News, 28 February 2004.
-  Iraq war legal advice published, BBC News, 28 April 2005.
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||283 (+2 tell)||4||0||70.8%|
|PC||0||3 (+1 tell)||0||100.0%|
|SNP||0||4 (+1 tell)||0||100.0%|
|Harry Cohen||Leyton and Wanstead||Lab||aye|
|Jeremy Corbyn||Islington North||Lab||aye|
|John Martin McDonnell||Hayes and Harlington||Lab||aye|