Whatever happened to the Chilcot report?

27th January, 2014 8:44 am

The Iraq Inquiry, headed by Sir John Chilcot, held its final public session almost exactly three years ago. The report, all 1,000,000+ words of it, is written and ready to be published. It has been for some time. All that remains is for agreement between the Chilcot committee and the government on which sensitive documents – communication between President Bush and prime minsters Blair and Brown, which the committee has seen – can be shared with the public. Final publication of the report will occur once those criticised in the report have been sent relevant passages in advance of publication to give them a chance to respond – the so-called “Maxwellisation” process.

Sir John himself thought that publication might have been possible last summer, four years after the inquiry process was launched by Gordon Brown. The investigation has been thorough and painstaking, considering evidence and material dating back to 2000. So of course it has taken a long time. But publication is still some way off. Last week in his Evening Standard column the well-informed Matthew d’Ancona suggested that the report would not be published before the summer recess.

What is taking so long? The sensitivity of some of these documents is obvious. But the committee has seen them and is serious about its task. It is unlikely they are seeking the publication of anything that would damage national security. Delay causes suspicion – and cynicism – to grow.

Ask around Westminster and you will be offered a range of comments on the (eventual) publication of the Chilcot report. “What is it really going to tell us that we don’t already know?” is one weary response. Others are darker still. One quite senior civil servant told me, as far as Tony Blair’s actions are concerned: “This is what prime ministers do.” In other words, we should not be too squeamish about the idea of the executive, at the centre, being decisive and taking action. And if things occasionally go wrong, so be it.

blair.jpg

Blair himself is said to be rather anxious, understandably, over what Chilcot will say. There is a feeling in parts of Whitehall that Lord Butler’s 2004 report into the use of intelligence ahead of the second Iraq war pulled its punches, and that its conclusions, grasped fully only by those who are fluent in “mandarin”, went under-appreciated. At its launch Lord Butler expected at least one member of the press to ask whether he felt prime minister Blair should “consider his position” – code for resigning. The answer would have been a long yes. But not a single representative of Fleet Street’s finest asked that question. (Incidentally, Sir John Chilcot was a member of Lord Butler’s committee.)

To some extent the weary voices that say we won’t learn anything new from Chilcot may have a point. The debate over a possible limited military strike on Syria in the summer took place in the shadow of Iraq. Prime minister Cameron acknowledged that in his insistence on having a parliamentary debate and vote before any military action could take place. Maybe the lessons of Chilcot have already been learned. Sir John said that the purpose of his Iraq inquiry was:

“to establish, as accurately as possible, what happened and to identify the lessons that can be learned. Those lessons will help ensure that, if we face similar situations in future, the government of the day is best equipped to respond to those situations in the most effective manner in the best interests of the country.”

It was in precisely that spirit that the debate on Syria took place.

But even if we have to wait until the autumn to see the final text, it must finally come out. I understand the committee is determined that this once and for all account will be published, in full. It will be an uncomfortable moment for some. The political implications are uncertain. But this is one occasion where the public will have to be told, unflinchingly, what happened, no matter how awkward or unsettling that may be.

Ed Miliband has already been warned, by Peter Mandelson among others, that he will have to be careful in his response to Chilcot. I’m sure he will be. But he has little personally to fear from it. Indeed its publication will allow him to assert that the next Labour government will in crucial details operate differently from the last one. It will help Miliband detach himself from some of the more unfortunate aspects of the New Labour legacy. Labour stands to gain politically from Chilcot, not be damaged by it.

You don’t suppose that this explains the delay in its publication, do you?

  • swatnan

    Chillcott is in danger of becoming another dodgy dossier with lots of hedging and redactions and incomplete truths. The fact is Iraq was an absolute dogs breakfast, and will go down in history as one of the biggest balls up of all time, and the greatest disasters of all times. And theres no getting away from it. So EdM would be advised to admit it, and Labour to move on, and get over it. There have been countless other military disasters in the history of Great Britain; its just another to put in the cupboard along with the other skeltons. BTW it had nothing to do with new Labour; it could have happened under old Labour just as well.

    • treborc1

      Chilcot came in one day and saw this dark figure bent over a shredder, and now it’s all gone, he has to start again, another three years.

  • treborc1

    One dark night three people one with big ears were seen sneaking into the building sneaked into the office and pinched it.

    It has to be, they seek him here, they seek him there, they seek Tony Blair everywhere.

    Either that or he has threatened to take Chilcot to court if he damages his money making racket. Maybe it’s been shredded with a lot of other evidence from labour top socialist….

  • ColinAdkins

    Maybe one for Scully and Mulder.

    • treborc1

      The X files, sounds about right.

  • Daniel Speight

    I fear Chilcot may be the last opportunity to bring Blair to account over the actions that led to Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war. The last chance to understand what this presidential style of leadership opened the door to. It’s becoming fairly obvious that politicians and the top end of the civil service would be happy for this report to be swept under the carpet.

    • Doug Smith

      Blair’s supporters in the media will also be very much in favour of the ‘under the carpet’ option.

      Let’s not forget Nuremberg precedent: those who support an aggressive war through acts of propaganda are deemed to be as culpable as those who draw up the battle plans.

      • treborc1

        I suspect Blair will point his little finger at America or Campbell and say they made me do it honestly.

  • reformist lickspittle

    It has been. So get off your deeply tedious and self-righteous high horse.

  • http://www.pearshapedcomedy.com Anthony Miller

    I doubt we will see it till 2016 http://www.pearshapedcomedy.com/TimTyler.html

  • MincePie

    If Ed and Labour has nothing to fear from the inquiry why did he vote against holding it so often?

Latest

  • News Just over 48 hours to go – and the polls are still neck and neck

    Just over 48 hours to go – and the polls are still neck and neck

    If there’s going to be a significant crossover to the Tories – as Lynton Crosby has predicted – then it’s either already happened and the pollsters have missed it, or it’s going to happen in the final 48 hours of the campaign. Because so far, the polls are all telling a similar story – tied, or a narrow lead either way: YouGov CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 12%, GRN 5% Populus CON 34%, LAB 34%, LDEM 10%, UKIP […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Miliband: Labour wouldn’t borrow more than the Tories

    Miliband: Labour wouldn’t borrow more than the Tories

    Today Ed Miliband was interviewed by the BBC’s James Landale, in which he gave a clear message to the public just two days before the election: “I’m ready to run this country for working people”. During this interview, Miliband also spoke about the economy and he told Landale that a Labour government wouldn’t borrow more than the Conservatives – because the Tories would miss their deficit targets, just as they have done during this parliament. Miliband also said that abolishing non-dom status […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Miliband: Labour will put “working people first”

    Miliband: Labour will put “working people first”

    Tomorrow Ed Miliband will lay out the choice for the electorate: between a Labour government that “puts working people first” or a Tory government that “works only for the privileged few”. To illustrate this difference he will reiterate the party’s pledge to abolish the non-dom status. Miliband will say that the non-dom rule currently allows very rich people to avoid paying tax and he will also point out that the Conservatives, UKIP and the Lib Dems have all defended this two hundred-year-old […]

    Read more →
  • News Why has this Labour candidate been the target of a “deeply divisive leaflet” which backs her Tory opponent?

    Why has this Labour candidate been the target of a “deeply divisive leaflet” which backs her Tory opponent?

    Uma Kumaran is the Labour PPC for Harrow East, she’s running a closely fought campaign against Tory Bob Blackman, but recently, these leaflets have been going out in the constituency, targeting her and the (in a poor third place) Lib Dem candidate over their party’s views on laws to outlaw caste discrimination. The leaflet goes on to back Blackman: The leaflet has been distributed by the organisation Dharma Sewa Purva Paksha (DSP) – based in Leicester – whose managing editor Mukesh […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Why I’m voting Labour

    Why I’m voting Labour

    I’m voting Labour. Obviously you’d hope that’s what I’d say in a column for LabourList, but I want to use my final column before Election Day to explain my decision. The usual purpose of this column is to write about what Class is up to, so I want to be clear that I am not setting out a position for Class, which is an independent think tank unaffiliated with any particular party or union. But I am voting Labour. And […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit