Israel Matzav

One MP, who declined to be named publicly, said he began to regret his decision to vote against military action within minutes of stepping out of the Division Lobby – because television screens began to show new footage of suffering Syrian innocents. 

...

After they had left the Chamber, some of the more reflective Labour politicians quickly found their consciences being pricked when, as if on cue, television images of an apparent firebomb attack on children and adults in a Syrian town near Aleppo began to appear on television screens inside the Palace of Westminster.

“Just as we came out of the Chamber the news of that napalm attack was running on the TV news, which looked like it could have only come from the regime,” said one Labour backbencher.

“Horrific pictures, absolutely horrific. You’d help but wonder what on earth we had just done.”
Another Labour MP admitted that every atrocity to emerge from Syria would now give rise to a pang of doubt.

“We will all have this on our consciences,” he said. “It may have been the right decision, but every time I see footage of another Syrian atrocity I will wonder.”

Even Labour backbenchers who are normally supportive of Mr Miliband said the party political approach adopted by their leadership had left them feeling ashamed.

They admitted the catcalling and points-scoring which developed in the House of Commons over a vote of such monumental, life-and-death importance had been highly inappropriate.
“There were colleagues grinning, clapping, celebrating,” said one Miliband loyalist. 

...

When the Labour leader left Downing Street, Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg were convinced the Opposition would largely back the Government’s motion.

“That was our biggest mistake – to trust Ed Miliband not to play party politics with dead children,” said one senior Government source. “We were genuinely astonished – shocked. The only thing we can think of is that the Shadow Cabinet told him to u-turn and he did.”

Labour disputes this account of the Downing Street meeting. They say Mr Miliband had made no final agreement to back the motion. A Labour source said: “We were asked to a meeting. We attended and we listened to what was said. That was the right and proper thing to do.”

When pressed why Mr Miliband gave no initial signal that he might not back the motion, the source added: “If someone hands you a piece of paper at the end of a meeting with a lot of words on it the proper thing to do is to read it and consult with your party.”

At 4.30pm Mr Miliband chaired a 15-minute conference call of the Shadow Cabinet, where Labour’s front-bench team unanimously agreed not to back the Government motion.

A Labour spokesman said that the call was “business like”, but one party insider admits that senior members of the Shadow Cabinet had been alarmed by how little public support there had been for an attack on Syria.

At 5:15pm, the Labour leader called the Prime Minister back to say that he and his party would not support the Government’s motion. A furious exchange ensued between the two men.

“It was stark raving hypocrisy,” said a senior Government source. “Miliband was putting his party before the national interest. It was thoroughly dishonourable behaviour.”

A few minutes later the Leader of the Opposition posted a message on Twitter announcing Labour’s position.

Miliband sounds like he'd fit right in with the American Democratic party.

These are not times for partisan politics nor are they times to make decisions based on polls. Unfortunately, with no great power to lead the world's democracies, that's exactly what's happening.