WHEN the House of Commons Chamber and Member’s Lobby was rebuilt after the War having been destroyed by a Nazi bomb, Winston Churchill ordered that the arch between the two rooms be reconstructed using the damaged stones from the old, bombed arch.

He argued that by doing this, “members of parliament will never forget the futility of war”. Monday this week saw the debate in parliament on the implementation of UN Resolution 1973.

For the 250 or so new MPs elected last year, this is the first time that we have been asked to support a new armed conflict. For me, the symbolism of the damaged entrance arch to the chamber has never been stronger. I was extremely uncomfortable about the second Gulf War and have always questioned myself as to how I would have voted at the time had I been an MP.

The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it also helps frame an opinion when looking at future conflicts. That Gaddafi is killing his own people in reaction to a popular uprising is appalling and coming to the aid of those people is incredibly important. But just as important – indeed more so – is the fact that our Prime Minister led the moves to deal with this and in so doing secured the necessary UN Resolution to ensure the proper legality of this action. UN Security Resolution 1973 authorises the enforcement of the no-fly zone and also authorises all necessary measures to protect civilians and populated areas under threat of attack. Importantly, and this was repeated by the prime minister in his opening statement to a packed chamber, the resolution does not allow for ground troops or any invading force. The debate was, in the broadest sense, supported by the vast majority of MPs and it was a truly special event to see parliament working so well. But at the same time, the debate asked many, many questions. Why are we taking action in Libya and not in other countries supposedly having the same problems? What constitutes a successful outcome? Just how strong is the support from other Arab nations? Importantly, there were speeches from a number of MPs who have served in the military and have firsthand experience of the effects of war. So, if I was uncertain about how I would have voted when the second Gulf War was debated, I was satisfied that, given the current information and the legitimacy of the UN resolution 1973, this commitment to action in Libya is sound. But voting to commit our armed forces to action will, I suspect, always be the hardest vote for an MP and it is something that I hope we will not have to do again. CONTACT YOUR MP Email mark.garnier.mp@ parliament. uk Telephone 020 7219 7198 or 01562 746771 Write 9a Lower Mill Street, Kidderminster, DY11 6UU, or House of Commons, Westminster, London SW1A 0AA