I FOUND the letter from Geoffrey Cox, the Torridge and West Devon Conservative spokesman (March 27), interesting in rather more ways than he no doubt intended.
As someone who listened to the parliamentary debate on Iraq in its entirety, courtesy of Radio 4 long-wave, I did not need to be told about the moral contortions that John Burnett had to perform in order to decide on how to cast his vote.
Although not entirely in agreement with his conclusions, I could not but approve of the fact that he clearly recognised the complexity of the issues involved when applying his conscience to reaching his decision.
Mr Cox, on the other hand, seems concerned solely with the question of what political advantage he can hope to gain from the matter, to the extent that he has not even troubled to determine the nature and order of the votes that were taken that evening.
He refers to Mr Burnett?s ?. . . decision to abstain on the government motion . . . and then to vote in favour of a motion stating that the case for war had not been made. . .?.
In fact, he voted first for an amendment to the government motion (along with a small but distinguished group of Conservative members) and then, for reasons explained elsewhere in the same issue of the Times, when this was lost he abstained on the substantive motion.
In view of the level of political ignorance displayed by his opponents in the constituency, Mr Burnett should have little to worry about at the next election.
Mike Smith-Rawnsley
28 Honicombe Park
Callington