Whatever happened to the Chilcot report?

January 27, 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 Last week in his Evening Standard column the well-informed Matthew d’Ancona suggested that the report would not be published before the summer recess.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

Latest

  • Comment Labour can be the party to tackle the climate crisis

    Labour can be the party to tackle the climate crisis

    A week ago today, a little article in the Evening Standard did the rounds in which Green leader Natalie Bennett received quite the monstering for travelling around Europe by train because she is opposed to flying on principle. “I haven’t flown for seven or eight years,” she said. “I quite like train travel because you can work on a train and I sleep very well on them. I would do it again.” One of Bennett’s detractors was Labour MP John […]

    Read more →
  • Featured “Absurd”: Labour react to East Coast railway sell off

    “Absurd”: Labour react to East Coast railway sell off

    Labour have reacted angrily to the news this morning that the rights to run the East Coast Main Line, which is currently run by a public operator, has been won by a consortium of Virgin and Stagecoach. The franchise has been in public hands with East Coast since 2009, after then operator National Express ran into financial trouble, and has since returned £800 million to the public purse. However, under current rules, East Coast could not bid for the franchise as […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Ukip: this rhetoric has repercussions

    Ukip: this rhetoric has repercussions

    Yesterday, I witnessed a horrible act of racism. At a bus stop, a well dressed and well spoken man started literally screaming in the faces of a family of tourists how much he hated foreigners, how they were freeloaders and how they should go back where they came from. It was horrible. I haven’t seen anything like it in a very, very long time – and certainly not in London. I felt like I had stepped back in time to […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Labour will move civil service jobs out of London

    Labour will move civil service jobs out of London

    Tonight, Ed Balls will give a speech in Birmingham where he’ll explain that the as part of a next Labour government’s devolution agenda they would move more civil service jobs outside London and transfer more powers over the economy and funding to city and county regions. This comes ahead of the publication of Labour’s second interim report Labour’s Zero-Based Review tomorrow. This is part of Labour’s efforts to account for how money is spent in the UK – to analyse […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour MPs get behind Social Care campaign

    Labour MPs get behind Social Care campaign

    A Month ago I wrote a piece attacking the scandal of the care workers who don’t receive the minimum wage. It followed an EDM from Labour MP Dave Anderson (himself a former care worker) that called for tough action to be taken against those who are responsible and ensuring that those who care for many of our most vulnerable citizens get the minimum wage (obviously they should be paid more, but the minimum wage should be the absolute legal floor as things […]

    Read more →