Iraq, Parliament and the Church of England

The recall of Parliament during a recess is a signifier that grave matters are afoot. 

As the debating forum of a democracy, it does more than make decisions – it expresses itself in full view of the electorate it is there to represent.

That electorate is increasingly disturbed about events in Iraq and it is fitting that public disquiet at the calamity unfolding there should be acknowledged, articulated and explored in the chamber of our legislature.

Some argue that unless the Prime Minister intends to commit British troops in opposition to the militants of Islamic State who are now wreaking brutal and potentially genocidal destruction in a country we have done so much to destabilise, there is no need for a recall.

But that is to take no account of the fact that there is much which needs to be said.

If the saying is left to the largely unmoderated forum of social media, it is likely to generate more heat than light.

The loudest voices are not necessarily the best informed and we need to remind ourselves that violent speech often generates violent action.

The situation in Iraq is complex and any response made by the UK government must be validated by open and accountable discourse.

At its best, the House of Commons is capable of this and when the playground brawling and bawling of set-pieces like Prime Minister's Questions are set aside, it can be the site of searching and civilised debate.

That debate will need all the civilising qualities of intellect, conscientious discernment and nuance.

The 'something must be done' argument is compelling and what that 'something' might be is another question.

From full scale military intervention, through logistical support for US forces and humanitarian aid, to the responses of radical non-violence, there are demanding moral arguments to be made.

When these arguments are not heard in the central institution of our democracy, we are deprived of enlargement and understanding.

It is a cause of concern that senior politicians seem to be either unaware or afraid of this.

Number 13 in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons makes this provision:

“Whenever the House stands adjourned and it is represented to the Speaker by Her Majesty’s Ministers that the public interest requires that the House should meet at a time earlier than that to which the House stands adjourned, the Speaker, if he is satisfied that the public interest does so require, may give notice that, being so satisfied, he appoints a time for the House to meet, and the House shall accordingly meet at the time stated in such notice.”

The Right Rev Nick Baines has released his letter sent to Mr Cameron, which was published on Sunday 17th August 2014 in the Observer newspaper.

In the letter Bishop Nick describing British policy on Islamic extremism as not “coherent or comprehensive”.

The letter follows widespread claims that Britain and the west have been slow to respond to unfolding events in Iraq as Islamic State, formerly known as Isis, has imposed its bloody rule across northern Iraq and swaths of Syria.

The Bishop of Leeds (West Yorkshire & the Dales) says in the letter:

 "That he remains very concerned about the government’s response to several issues”

Bishop Nick goes on to poses questions to the Prime Minster about his policy towards Iraq and Syria.

The letter comes as the Church of England has issued posters to churches and called on its members to pray, act and give to those suffering and who have been driven out of their homes in Iraq.

It is hard to think of anything more in the public interest than the open exploration of past and present policy failures in Iraq, analysis of their consequences and consideration of actions that will bring the least harm and the greatest relief to that distressful country.