David Reed MP

Prime Minister represents the whole country, not just legal nuance, writes former Royal Marine and Afghanistan veteran David Reed MP #DailyExpress #Echobox=1773052961" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">express.co.uk/news/politics/…

'If Donald Trump doesn't know where we're heading, how can she?' @mattfrei challenges Tory MP David Reed over Kemi Badenoch's stance on the Iran War.

On Tuesday's #PoliticsLive John Slinger MP, Labour David Reed MP, Conservative Ava-Santina Evans, PoliticsJOE 12:15pm BBC Two bbc.in/3NpdYxb

The world is becoming more volatile by the day. We can sit back and pretend it’s not happening. Or we can act to protect ourselves. This is leadership fit for the times we live in 👇

At today’s Chancellor’s Spring Economic Forecast, I raised an issue affecting so many in my generation: student debt. Our student finance system is not working as it should.

His first responsibility is to ensure that Britain can and will defend itself- clearly, lawfully, and decisively if in danger. He’s currently failing in that regard.

I have just listened to the Prime Minister’s statement on Iran, and his argument simply does not withstand scrutiny. To quote him directly:

Advice. That is not a sustainable way to conduct national policy. The Prime Minister is no longer acting as a lawyer interpreting legal nuance. He is the leader of our country.

Even more troubling is the sense that our foreign policy is being shaped by unnamed, unelected international lawyers. Parliament does not know who these individuals are, cannot scrutinise their reasoning, and has no visibility of the assumptions or interests informing their..

Or is he arguing that, under his interpretation of international law, the United Kingdom lacks the legal justification to defend itself when it is directly attacked? Defence is the operative word here.

That raises an obvious and serious question. Given that the Iranian regime has now attacked UK military bases, is the Prime Minister suggesting that Britain does not have the capability to defend its own personnel and assets?

“The only way to stop the (Iranian)threat is to destroy the missiles at source- in their storage depots or at the launchers. The US requested permission to use British bases for that specific and limited defensive purpose, because they (the US) have the capabilities to do so.”

It is time for Sir Keir to decide whether he wants to continue thinking like an international lawyer- or lead the United Kingdom in a far more dangerous world.

It is time for the Prime Minister to wake up to the realities of what is happening in the Middle East and across the wider region. If he cannot do that, then he should step aside and allow someone who can.

This is not about party politics, and we should not view the deterioration of global security through that lens. But I am glad that my party leader, Kemi Badenoch, has been clear-eyed about the threat from the Iranian regime and has backed recent US and Israeli strikes.

This is a moment that requires cognitive flexibility, strategic clarity and leadership. I would urge him to listen to Mark Carney’s speech at Davos about the scale of the challenge we face- and the kind of leadership it demands.

Hiding from the bully and hoping he doesn’t find you is an approach that will not keep us safe. Sir Keir, shaped by his background as an international lawyer, seems determined to defend a constructed worldview rather than adapt to the new global reality we are living through.

the line that “the UK played no part in strikes against Iran.” If I were still serving and based in Cyprus, facing the risk of attack, and I heard my political leaders speaking in those terms, my confidence in them would diminish rapidly.

Yet despite recognising the danger, they cannot bring themselves to align properly with those allies who are prepared to act. Even worse, after the Iranian regime attacked our military base in Cyprus, the Prime Minister and members of his Cabinet went onto the media repeating

We all know that the Iranian regime is murderous, terrorist in nature and fundamentally destabilising. It is a threat to the region and to us. The Government itself acknowledged that point- in response to my question to the former Foreign Secretary nearly a year ago.

Sitting on the fence with no clear or discernible foreign policy is not a viable strategy. It is doing real and potentially irrevocable damage to our national security, and it is weakening the confidence of our allies.