On Monday November 13th 2006 I wrote, here, about cluster bombs.

I said I had contacted my MP, David Cameron, in September, asking for his views on whether they should be banned; and that I had not yet had a reply.

On February 28th I did receive a full response.

Briefly, he agreed that these weapons are undoubtedly "unpleasant" and can be abused, but "should we have an outright ban?"

"We do need to recognise that there is a difference between "smart" and "dumb" cluster munitions", he wrote. "Conservatives support the Government's plan to withdraw from service "dumb" munitions by the middle of the next decade"

Slightly strangely, he then goes on to assert that "the Government should press for an internationally agreed definition as to what is a cluster munition and what the distinctions are between a dumb and smart munition."

I have tried to follow this up myself and I discovered a website called "Defense Industry Daily" - it sounds a bit like one of those magazines quoted in "Have I Got News for You?". It's "military purchasing news for defense procurement managers and contractors", and is obviously American - spelling of the word "defence"!

On May 17th 2006 they reported that the Wind Compensated Munitions Dispenser or "Wick-Mid" is a new tail kit which uses inertial guidance to turn dumb cluster bombs into accurate smart weapons. It costs about $9,000 per unit.

What do YOU think?

Should there be an outright ban of all these weapons?

Or do you agree with the Government that dumb weapons should be scrapped but that some, more modern cluster munitions are a legitimate weapon when used in accordance with international humanitarian law? (This is the official Labour view, as reported by Ian Black in the Guardian of February 24th 2007. Also in that story was the bald reminder that "up to 60% of the victims of cluster bombs in South East Asia are children")