Shropshire MPs' views at odds over Syria strikes

Daniel Kawczynski, Conservative MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham, and his Montgomeryshire party colleague, Glyn Davies, insist that Prime Minister David Cameron will need to make a compelling case that air strikes will improve the situation for British people and Syria.

Back in 2013 the Prime Minister lost a House of Commons vote on launching military action in Syria, however, Mr Kawczynski says he believes the mood of politicians and the public is shifting and that people would now be more likely to support action.

"The mood of the house is changing and has changed significantly since the Paris bombings and I think the Prime Minister is obviously intimating that Isis is not just an issue in Syria or Paris, but that they are a threat to British people across Europe and potentially here in the UK," he said.

"When we had the vote on military action in Syria in 2013 I think the consensus was a lot of people were opposed. They had had enough of British involvement overseas, they did not want us embroiled in another Middle Eastern civil war.

"But now, I am getting the impression that residents of Shrewsbury want an attempt at getting some sort of diplomatic solution but if that fails then they will support air strikes. Whether they support boots on the ground is a different matter."

Mark Pritchard, MP for The Wrekin, said that he would back the Prime Minister and that the United Kingdom "must do its bit" in tackling Islamic State.

He said: "Isil are a threat to the UK whether we take part in air strikes or not. Isil extremists want to kill UK citizens and crush our values and end our way of life. They are an enemy to our freedoms and our prosperity.

"In an ideal world there would be no wars or conflict, but they need to be killed before they kill us. Isil cannot be defeated in Iraq alone. We need to strike at their command and control centres in Syria. The UK needs to be part of an overall military effort. We should not just leave it to the French and the Americans. We must do our bit."

Mr Kawczynski said that MPs would need to be convinced that a long-term strategy was in place before supporting any kind of military action.

He said: "The Foreign Affairs Select Committee report concluded that before Parliament would have confidence in voting for such a matter the Prime Minister would have to appear before us with a more detailed plan for the military objectives and long term strategic planning.

"This is vital because as we have seen in Libya the raw emotions led to a very speedy British involvement which destroyed Colonel Gaddafi's military capability but left a vacuum for Isis to operate in.

"We want a detailed explanation of how and why British military involvement will be different to Libya - that we will not be exacerbating the situation and how involvement will lead to a peace settlement for the country. It will be in that detailed response that the House of Commons will decide to give him the mandate to do it."

Mr Davies added: "My position is the same as it was two years ago. I need the Prime Minister to come and persuade me it is the right thing to do and will improve the situation in the Middle East.

"I do not want to be an armchair general but the feeling is that ground forces would have to go in to take Isis on and I think it should be essentially local Middle Eastern forces that do that with air support from Western forces. If we do not do it like that I suspect it would work as a recruitment sergeant for Isil."

Telford MP Lucy Allan said: "At this current time I support the Prime Minister and his statement which he gave to the house on Tuesday. This is a global terror threat which risks our future way of life."