THE Syrian conflict has revealed divisions among the three MPs, all Conservative, who serve the Advertiser area.

Yesterday (thurs) Prime Minister David Cameron recalled parliament for a debate on the alleged chemical attacks said to have been carried out by President Bashar al-Assad on his own people and which left hundreds dead or injured.

Mr Cameron had wanted a mandate giving Britain the right to take military action against the Western Asian state where civil war has raged since 2011.

He said any strike against al-Assad's forces would be 'legal, proportionate and focused' and help prevent any further use of chemical weapons. But the motion was defeated by 285 votes to 272, thanks in part to 39 coalition MPs who refused to toe the line.

Among them was Newton Abbot member Anne Marie Morris who said: 'After listening to the debate and carefully considering the representations made to me by my constituents I decided to vote against the Government motion on Syria.   'The deployment of chemical weapons in Syria is abhorrent and has been rightly condemned. However, I believe military action should only be taken to defend the country and the national interest.    'I do not believe taking military action against Syria meets this test. Indeed, military action offers no guarantee of success and an almost certain loss of life.'  

Totnes MP Dr Sarah Wollaston, whose constituency includes Holne, said during the debate: 'Parliament has done its job today. It has applied the brakes to a headlong rush into unilateral western military action. 'The problem with the motion, which is undeniably full of a series of truths, is that it draws one into agreement. However, there is a sting in the tail, which is that it asks us to agree that unilateral western military action is legally justified. I do not agree with that statement. For that reason, I am sorry that I will not support the Government motion.'

Alone in his support for Mr Cameron was Central Devon MP Mel Stride. He said: 'I supported the Government's motion as it did not commit us to immediate action and required a second vote from Parliament if we were to get involved in a limited strike.

'This was never about 'war' to deter Assad from contributing to use chemical weapons on his citizens including children.

'The result of losing the vote will be celebration amongst Assad and his henchmen who will see this as a green light to further atrocities, we should not forget that this is his fourteenth use of chemical weapons and it will not be his last.

'The US and France will now probably act in our absence.

'I understand why people are reticent for us to become involved after Iraq but this is not Iraq, no dodgy dossiers and no boots on the ground. And there would have been no action prior to the UN inspectors report and a second vote in parliament to examine the evidence and to sanction any action.

'Not acting is as much a choice as acting and yesterday's decision may yet see the gassings of even more innocent people.

'There are strong precedents for humanitarian military action.  There were many who said we should not have gone to the aid of Kosovo. We did and it spared the world a further humanitarian catastrophe.'