Hoon plays down new row over Iraq weapons

British defence secretary Geoff Hoon today tried to play down new controversy surrounding the 45-minute claim in the British government’s Iraq dossier.

He was commenting after the British Prime Minister admitted yesterday that he had been unaware that the controversial claim referred only to battlefield weapons when he asked MPs to vote for war.

In a round of broadcast interviews this morning, Mr Hoon said the type of weapon the 45-minute claim referred to was “not a huge issue” at the time.

Questioned during the Commons debate on the Hutton Inquiry yesterday, Tony Blair said he had not known what sort of weapons were being referred to at the time of the crucial vote on March 18.

“I have already indicated exactly when this came to my attention. It wasn’t before the debate on March 18 last year,” he said.

Mr Blair’s disclosure has raised further questions about the handling of intelligence in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.

It came as a former intelligence official who gave evidence to the Hutton Inquiry said crucial material which convinced spy chiefs Iraq was continuing to produce chemical and biological weapons may have been “misinterpreted”.

The dossier, published in September 2002, stated that Iraq had some chemical and biological weapons capable of being deployed within 45 minutes.

However, Joint Intelligence Committee chairman John Scarlett told the Hutton Inquiry it only referred to tactical battlefield weapons – such as shells and mortars – and not long-range ballistic missiles, as had been widely assumed at the time.

Mr Hoon also admitted to the inquiry he had known it probably referred to battlefield weapons but had done nothing to correct the media reporting.

However, the way the information was presented was criticised by both the chief of the MI6, Richard Dearlove, in his evidence to the inquiry and the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee.

In the Commons however, Mr Blair defended its inclusion in the dossier.

“If there were chemical or biological or nuclear battlefield weapons, that most certainly would be a weapon of mass destruction and the idea that their use would not threaten the region’s stability I find somewhat eccentric,” he said.

Downing Street said the original MI6 report on the 45 minute point had not specified the “delivery system” involved and so there had been no reason for the British Prime Minister to ask the question.

But former British foreign secretary Robin Cook, who resigned from the British government over the war, said he was “surprised” by Mr Blair’s claim not to know the nature of the weapons covered.

“In my resignation speech I did make the very point that we were considering battlefield weapons and that Saddam probably had no real weapons of mass destruction,” he said.

“I find it difficult to reconcile what I knew and what I am sure the Prime Minister knew at the time we had the vote in March.”

Shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram said Mr Blair’s response “raises serious questions about what the government knew when Britain went to war in Iraq.

“His answer places him completely at odds with comments made by Robin Cook and Geoff Hoon that they knew before the war that the 45 minute claim only referred to battlefield munitions and not to long range chemical and biological weapons.

“He should now come clean and either apologise and correct his comments in the House of Commons today or explain why he did not know what two members of his Cabinet knew at that time.”

Mr Hoon is likely to face further questioning on the issue when he appears before MPs on Britain's Defence Select Committee, hearing evidence on lessons learned from Iraq.