Did parliament’s Afghanistan debate matter?

Today’s Commons debate on Afghanistan was unusually and surprisingly good. It had the benefit of speeches from many MPs who had themselves served tours of duty in the country, or were veterans of military action elsewhere. It had the advantage of a former Prime Minister speaking with all the authority of someone who knows just how difficult these matters are, rather than the criticisms of backbenchers who had only run their own constituency office. It was a full day’s session operating under usual rules, rather than the hybrid parliament of the past year and a half. This meant that MPs could intervene on speeches, amid the normal hubbub of the Chamber.

This was not, however, the design of the Conservative whips, who had originally set up a session lasting from 9.30am – 2.30pm. At one point, the debate was actually going to be a statement, which would have meant there was only around three hours for backbench contributions.