Lib Dems snub Blair's review of Iraq intelligence

British Prime Minister Tony Blair today set up a review of intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction – but any hopes that its report would be the final word on the affair were dashed when the Liberal Democrats refused to take part.

The British government sought to draw a line under its use of secret information to promote the case for war against Saddam Hussein’s regime with an all-party committee modelled on the Franks Inquiry into the Falklands war.

But Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy refused to co-operate with the probe when No 10 insisted it would not be able to examine the political use of the intelligence used to lead the country into war.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was therefore forced to tell the Commons only one senior Labour and Tory MP would join the five-strong committee whose remit also encompasses the “intelligence coverage available” on all countries “of concern” with regard to WMD and the global trade in them.

Other members of the committee, chaired by ex-Cabinet Secretary Lord Robin Butler, are another former senior civil servant and an ex-chief of the defence staff.

Horse-trading between the British government and the Lib Dems continued to no avail until shortly before Mr Straw made his statement to MPs.

He said Labour’s former chief whip Ann Taylor and Tory Michael Mates would join ex-civil servant Sir John Chilcot and former chief of the defence staff Field Marshal Lord Inge in presenting a report to be published before the Commons summer recess in July.

The review committee will meet in private and its report will be published, although sections dealing with top-secret material may be blanked-out.

Mr Straw said the committee would work closely with its counterpart in the United States and the coalition’s Iraq Survey Group which is still combing the country for evidence of WMD.

The Tories agreed to take part in the probe, arguing that its remit to “make recommendations to the Prime Minister for the future on the gathering, evaluation and use of intelligence on WMD, in the light of the difficulties of operating in countries of concern” allowed the way ministers interpreted secret information to be probed.

Conservative leader Michael Howard said that questions about the use the British government made of the intelligence provided to it were “fairly and squarely within the remit of this inquiry”.

He said he was “very surprised” by the reasons given by the Liberal Democrats for boycotting the review.

“I am confident that these terms of reference cover the use made by the government of the intelligence,” Mr Howard told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“Indeed, I was told that that was what the Prime Minister wanted them to do, amongst other things.”

Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy said it was “a matter of regret” that his party was unable to participate in the inquiry, but said its terms of reference were “unacceptable”.

He added: “My party has been asking for an independent inquiry into the controversial aspects of the build-up to our participation in the Iraq war for many months. I have frequently said that Lord Hutton’s remit was too narrow.

“The remit for this new inquiry is equally unacceptable.

“An inquiry which excludes politicians from scrutiny is unlikely to command public confidence.

“Politicians should always be willing to answer for their judgment and their competence to the public.

“There is now widespread public disbelief about the stated reasons for our participation in the war in Iraq. That disbelief is undermining public trust in the office of the Prime Minister.

“The way to re-establish that trust would be to have an inquiry which addresses the key questions directly and openly. It does not seem to me that this inquiry will be able to do that.

“I shall continue to challenge the government about these matters, as I and my party have been doing consistently over many months. We seek the answers the public is also seeking. I am not satisfied that this inquiry will satisfy those concerns.”

Earlier, Mr Blair, answering questions from MPs during his biannual appearance before the Commons Liaison Committee, explained why he thought an inquiry was now justified following comments from the ex-head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) David Kay that stockpiles of WMD would not be found in Iraq.

He said: “I think it is right, as a result of what David Kay has said, and the ISG now probably won’t report in the very near term its final report, that we have a look at the intelligence we received and whether it was correct or not.

“But I do simply say that whatever is discovered as a result of that inquiry, I do not accept that it was wrong to remove Saddam Hussein or the world is nota safer or better place for that.”

He made plain his differences with Mr Kennedy, saying: “The area of dispute is essentially that the inquiry should go into the political judgment that led us to war and I honestly think the political judgment has got to be in the end for the government and parliament.

“You can’t sub-contract that to a committee and I don’t believe frankly that the committee would want to look into that.”