Thank you to constituents who have taking the trouble to write about Syria, and the likely vote expected in Parliament. I appreciate the interest and concern being shown.

There is no simple answer to the disaster which is Syria. There is no one decision which guarantees that what is happening will end, and for some time it has been a case of what might make a bad situation slightly less bad, and might just have a chance of making things better.

We know what has not worked. Assad has been able to murder his own people at will, a situation made easier after no one moved against him following his use of chemical weapons in 2013. He has had support from Russia and Iran. There has been no Western intervention, but intervention by others. Assad's determination to attack those Syrians who sought to challenge his rule created the opportunity for so called ISIL (Daesh) to develop in opposition, supported at first by a variety of interests.

The result has been a disaster for the Syrian people. Perhaps 300,000 have died, millions have been displaced internally and a huge number has migrated. And Daesh has developed into the most vicious, fascist entity, recruiting widely across the world, while holding captive many people within their 'state'. While seeking to build its 'caliphate' geographically across the Middle East and North Africa, regardless of the will of its peoples, it also represents a clear threat to the United Kingdom, having inspired attacks against the UK, and UK nationals, as well as to those of other countries. You will know its particular viciousness as well as I do, so there is no need to spell it out. But it has to be stopped, and not everything can be stopped by negotiation.

So I think we all agree that we wish to see an end to both Daesh and the Assad regime. Some are arguing for measures to cut off the flow of funds and arms to ISIL and for action against those that trade with them – while that is necessary it is not sufficient. Daesh already has access and extensive funds and weapons. Action to reduce these items alone will do nothing in a realistic time frame to end the threats to those already enslaved, or being threatened. While both ideas are sensible, they are not enough.

There are new political efforts being made, towards the 'clear strategic plan' internationally, involving the surrounding states and including Iran and Russia. There should be comprehensive efforts to seek a cease fire between Assad's forces and his own people, but in the meantime the threat of Daesh requires immediate action. Reducing the threat from it cannot but help those threatened by it, wherever they may be, and will assist the political efforts for Syria.

As far as the UK is concerned, our forces are already engaged in Iraq. Daesh has lost territory, and the UK's particular precision weapons have proved to have the best chance of striking at key targets with the greatest accuracy. Their use in Syria, across a border not recognised by Daesh, will assist efforts to degrade them.

I do not suggest that this is the answer to everything, but I do believe it will be a step on the way. And I do believe that the Prime Minister made a case for a very limited extension of UK forces.

Much more needs to be done. Those who say bombing alone will not do the job are correct, but I do not know anyone in Government who thinks that. Nor are we 'bombing Syria'. The insidious false theology of Daesh must be countered, we must continue to do all we can in terms of domestic intelligence and security, and sooner or later Daesh must be fought on the ground by a combination of forces from the region. This is complex and may take some time. I expect any resolution put to Parliament to make that clear.

I agree with concerns that Syrian’s have been relentlessly attacked by Assad. However I have to point out that some of us did want to do something about that over two years ago, but received little support from members of the public, or Parliament. I voted with the Prime Minister, as Minister for the Middle East, in wanting to take military action against Assad for using chemical weapons. This was turned down, but I received few letters or emails worried about the plight of the Syrian people at Assad's hands, and have received very few in the past two years as the impact of that decision became clear. The failure by others to stop Assad allowed Daesh to claim that it was doing so. The two years that have followed have been a disaster. I wish we had stopped him then, which I believe would have led to the sort of negotiations and possible settlement that we are searching for now

I respect the views of my constituents, and acknowledge that this decision is difficult and can be argued both ways with honour and conviction. But if the Prime Minister asks for my support, I will give it to extend our actions to tackle Daesh in Syria, as a clear threat to all our security.