And after the election after saying nothing about tax rises Labour in government did exactly what the Liberal Democrats said was needed

And after the election, after saying nothing about tax rises, Labour in government did exactly what the Liberal Democrats said was needed.Now, with new money coming into the system, we must shift the focus of the debate over public services from investment to delivery – from how the money is raised to how the money is spent. The priority should be giving the money to those on the front line, and giving power to local people for local priorities.But if further investment becomes necessary to ensure first-class public services, Liberal Democrats will not hesitate to tell the truth on taxation – before the election, not after.. Shortly after 11.30am this morning I hope to rise on a Point of Order to seek the Speaker’s help about the procedure in today’s debate. It appears that the Government will begin the proceedings by moving a motion “that this House do now adjourn”. Such a motion should be debatable and should allow a vote so that Members of Parliament who believe that the House should continue to sit can express that view in the lobby. But such a vote does not permit those of us who will be voting to give their reasons, and it is on that point that I am seeking the help of the Speaker of the House, Michael Martin. I am therefore asking the Speaker to consider accepting a manuscript motion worded as follows: “that this house declines to support a war against Iraq, by the use of the Royal Prerogative, unless it has been authorised, both by the UN Security Council and a motion carried in this House of Commons”.Only in this way can MPs discharge their responsibilities to their constituents.

Such a motion would not preclude a motion to adjourn, which would follow at the end of the day’s parliamentary business in the usual way.I do not know, nor do the clerks of the House of the Commons know, of any ruling by previous speakers that would bind Mr Speaker Martin to reject this request. I submit that his responsibility as he has frequently and bravely shown in the last two years is to the House as a whole and that his authority as Speaker on procedure is unchallengeable. Against this background I will appeal to him to allow the motion to be moved, debated, and voted upon in parallel with the motion to adjourn.Along with Major-General Patrick Cordingley – I was once a tank crew member of the Seventh Armoured Brigade, which he was later to command in the Gulf – I fervently believe that those who are sent to risk their lives are entitled to the knowledge that the country is overwhelmingly behind them in a legitimate, just and sensible cause. Such conviction does not exist in Britain at the present time.I believe that a very important point was made by Natasha Walter in The Independent of 12 September, when she pointed out that the great threat to the West now comes from tiny minorities in societies that have been damaged and fragmented.

They jolly well were spies.If the Iraqis are resigned to an American attack anyway, why should they let in UN personnel who, though they might not know it, would be acting as forward air controllers drawing up an American hit list rather than monitoring compliance with UN resolutions? The invocation of the UN is a fig leaf. Recent events confirm that George Bush is determined to wage war against Iraq, whatever may emerge from the deliberations of the UN or any inspectors.There is one qualification to this: the US President makes increasing reference to the support that he is getting from Tony Blair. If the support were withdrawn, it is just possible that Bush might stay his hand (and this is the view of Congressman Bernard Sanders of Vermont, who is co-ordinating opposition to war against Iraq in the House of Representatives). This places a heavy responsibility on Parliament.Let us be clear that what is at issue is a war in which thousands of innocent people may die to prevent a contingency that is entirely hypothetical International terrorism is awful Full-scale war is many times more awful. By their invitation for any delegation of politicians, however critical, and experts to go to Iraq and see for themselves I believe, bluntly, that Saddam and Tariq Aziz are doing everything possible to avoid war.It seems to me that Bush and Blair are doing everything they can to avoid peace. That is why, and I can only speak for myself, I am in favour of regime change – in No 10 Downing Street..