History > 2007 > UK > Politics > Prime Minister Tony Blair (I)

Peter Brookes

political cartoon

Times

January 9, 2007

British Prime Minister Tony Blair

Background > Saddam Hussein hanging

3.15pm update

Downing Street

confirms talks with US

on 'son of Star Wars'

Friday February 23, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Mark Oliver

The UK has signalled to the US its interest in hosting part of the contentious "son of Star Wars" missile interceptor system, Downing Street confirmed today.

If the UK did host a missile silo or radar site it would likely prompt considerable opposition from the anti-war movement, and may spark protests echoing those at RAF Greenham Common in the 1980s.

The prime minister's office said today it had discussed the missile system with Washington, however a senior US diplomat said the country was not as yet interested in placing it in Britain.

"As we go forward there may be opportunities for us to talk to other countries about their needs, but right now we are concentrating on the Czech Republic and on Poland as the primary sites where we would be looking for this," the US deputy chief of mission in London, David Johnson, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One.

Earlier this week, the prime ministers of the Czech Republic and Poland said they were "likely" to accept a formal request from the Pentagon to part-host the system.

This prompted condemnation from a Russian general who said it would wreck the post-cold war balance of power in Europe. Moscow is furious at the prospect of former Soviet states being involved in the defence shield so close to its borders.

Russia claims that it is the missile shield's intended target, rather than a "rogue state" such as Iran, as the US insists.

Following a report in today's Economist that the UK was in talks with the US, a Downing Street spokesman confirmed that discussions were at an "early stage".

The Economist said a new missile silo could be sited at an existing US military base in the UK, but not at RAF Fylingdales in Yorkshire, which already houses early-warning radar equipment used within the system.

Britain's decision in 2003 to upgrade facilities at Fylingdales to support the missile interceptor system sparked enormous controversy and was bitterly opposed by some Labour MPs.

The Downing Street spokesman said: "The objective of these conversations was to make sure that the UK is kept in consideration to be one of the locations for the system should the US press ahead.

"No party to these discussions has got as far as discussing the specifics. We are simply at the stage where we have decided we want to be part of the discussion."

Downing Street sought to play down parts of the Economist report, which claims the prime minister, Tony Blair, had been "discreetly waging a campaign since last autumn to secure the missile-interceptor site for Britain". The No 10 spokesman said the article "goes too far" in its account of the stage of talks.

The spokesman did not comment on BBC reports suggesting that Mr Blair had raised the issue directly with the US president, George Bush, or that Mr Blair had charged his chief foreign affairs adviser, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, with liaising with the US national security council about the missiles.

It is thought the Pentagon wants to site a radar station in the Czech Republic, which would work in tandem with a silo of 10 interceptor weapons in neighbouring Poland. The cost of a European-based system has been estimated at £810m.

The various reports give the impression that the UK is actively seeking a role, whereas the Czechs and Polish appear to have been courted by the US. While the prime ministers of the east European countries have signalled support for the plan, both have also expressed misgivings.

Reports have also claimed that the Pentagon wants the interceptor silo to be considered as US territory, something about which the Polish prime minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, has said he is uneasy. Maintenance of the silo might require 500 US personnel.

Polls in both the Czech Republic and Poland reflect public unease; a recent poll showed that 53% of Poles opposed hosting such a base, while 34% were in favour. Since 2002, the US has built two missile interceptor sites in Alaska and California.

The system is supposed to work by firing missiles to shoot down enemy missiles targeting the territory of the United States or its allies.

Downing Street confirms talks with US on 'son of Star Wars', G, 23.2.2007, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/23/usa.foreignpolicy 

Blair to hit back

at 1.7 million toll protesters

Wednesday February 21, 2007
Guardian
Will Woodward and Dan Milmo

Congestion will increase by 40% in less than 20 years unless the government acts to deter car use, Tony Blair said last night.

Ahead of his reply to more than 1.7 million petitioners to the No 10 website condemning the prime minister's road pricing plans, Downing Street said it had to balance their views.

"We recognise that people feel strongly about this, but equally people feel very strongly about congestion. If we do nothing, congestion will have risen by 25% by 2010, 30% by 2015 and 40% by 2025," Mr Blair's spokesman said.

Downing Street was preparing to send Mr Blair's reply to petitioners from midnight, when the petition closed.

The spokesman said not every petitioner could be contacted immediately but as a courtesy staff were working to send the reply to the organisers of the petition in the first wave of replies.

Despite irritation in Whitehall about the petition, Downing Street insists it is showing the way for dialogue with the public. The petitions site, petitions.pm.gov.uk, was the most-visited government website last week - overtaking the Met Office and Transport for London - and the 66th most visited in the UK.

Peter Roberts, who launched the road-charging petition, rejected accusations by ministers that he had whipped up support for the poll via "myths" contained in widely circulated emails.

Mr Roberts, a sales manager from Telford, Shropshire, is a member of the Association of British Drivers, a stridently pro-car organisation, but he said it did not contact him until a month after the petition was posted. Inspired by the pro-hunting lobby's use of the Downing Street site, he began the petition by contacting 29 friends and emailing websites.

He added: "The only person behind the petition is me. It is not a sinister plot. I have started a petition that has been picked up by everybody else."

    Blair to hit back at 1.7 million toll protesters, G, 21.2.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/publicservices/story/0,,2017857,00.html

3.30pm update

Shootings 'tragic beyond belief',

says Blair

Friday February 16, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Staff and agencies

Armed police today began patrols in south London following the fatal shootings of three teenagers in less than two weeks, with Tony Blair saying "specific solutions" were needed to address gun crime.

Mr Blair described the deaths as "tragic beyond belief", with his comments coming as the home secretary, John Reid, prepared to meet MPs to discuss the government response to the shootings.

The most recent victim was 15-year-old Billy Cox, who was killed at his home in Clapham on Wednesday afternoon. The teenager's father, Tommy, today urged the community to "get behind the police 100%".

While the Tory leader, David Cameron, blamed increasing gun crime on the breakdown of two-parent families, Mr Blair said the shootings related to a "specific culture".

"Let us be careful in our response," the prime minister said. "This tragedy is not a metaphor for the state of British society, still less for the state of British youth today, the huge majority of whom, including in this part of London, are responsible and law-abiding young people.

"But it is a specific problem, in a specific criminal culture amongst specific groups of young people."

Mr Blair, speaking at the Labour National Youth Conference in Glasgow, said it would "require specific solutions to deal with guns and gangs as well as confronting broader questions of community and family responsibility".

He said some of those solutions would be put forward following discussions with police and community groups.

Mr Cameron said that, if elected, he would "compel men to stand by their families", if necessary by directly taking child support money from their accounts.

Speaking prior to a meeting with MPs to discuss the shootings, Mr Reid said policing and prisons were only part of the solution.

He said the problem "will not be solved ... without firm police action, firm powers and sufficient prison places".

The home secretary was said to be "sympathetic" to yesterday's call from Sir Ian Blair, the commissioner of the Metropolitan police, to lower the age at which those involved in gun crimes could receive the mandatory five-year sentence from 21 to 17.

Sir Ian ordered high-visibility police patrols around south London, some of them armed, in an attempt to calm fears and prevent further attacks.

A new taskforce will combine officers from Scotland Yard's gun crime unit, Operation Trident, with mobile teams and patrolling borough officers.

The killings began on February 3 when James Andre Smartt-Ford, 16, died after being shot at least twice at the Streatham Ice Arena.

Three days later, Michael Dosunmu was gunned down in his bedroom in Peckham in the early hours of the morning, only days after his 15th birthday. A man was arrested today in connection with the latter killing, police said yesterday.

Friends and neighbours of Billy, who lived on the Fenwick estate, yesterday said it appeared he had been shot after becoming involved in a row with another youth.

Janine Easton, whose children were friends with the victim, said the row could have begun over a text message.

She added that Billy had apparently been arguing with another teenager via their mobile phones, with the situation escalating. "I think it was something to do with cussing each other on text messages - something as silly as that," she said.

"Kids round here get into trouble and get sent to jail and come out thinking they are tough. They are just children ... but they are children with guns."

Another friend of Billy's said he had fallen out with members of a local gang.

Police yesterday said the victim's younger sister, Elizabeth, was returning home from school at just after 3.30pm on Wednesday when she heard a loud bang from the family's maisonette.

She found her brother fatally wounded in his bedroom. Another friend arrived, and the pair tried desperately to save his life. Paramedics were not able to save the teenager.

"Apparently he was alive when she got back, but he was never going to make it," Samantha Poynter, whose son regularly played with Billy and his sister, said.

Yesterday, police said it appeared the teenager - who was serving a supervision order for a burglary offence and was tagged and restricted to a curfew from 7pm to 7am - had been deliberately targeted and knew his attackers. They said there were no signs of forced entry at the maisonette.

Sir Ian said there was no evidence to link the murders, though there were "evidential leads" linking some of them. "There is no evidence to suggest that they are tit-for-tat, but they are entirely unacceptable to the communities of London," he added.

    Shootings 'tragic beyond belief', says Blair, G, 16.2.2007, http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,,2014884,00.html

Blair's defence

of special relationship with US

has hollow ring

Published: 07 February 2007
The Independent
By Andrew Grice, Political Editor

Tony Blair was accused of "delusional" behaviour after he mounted a strong defence of making Britain's special relationship with the United States the cornerstone of his foreign policy.

An unrepentant Mr Blair told MPs the relationship had given Britain more clout at the world's top table during his 10 years in power and insisted that it had resulted directly in progress on climate change, the Middle East and Africa. But his critics said little progress had been made on these issues and that Mr Blair had enjoyed little influence over President George Bush.

On the day that the family of the 100th British serviceman to die in action in Iraq spoke of their grief, the Prime Minister defended the use of force to oust Saddam Hussein. Second Lieutenant Jonathan Carlos Bracho-Cooke, 24, of the 2nd Battalion The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, was killed when a roadside bomb hit a patrol in Basra.

Mr Blair expressed confidence that Gordon Brown, his most likely successor, would continue his approach to military intervention after he stands down - even though the Chancellor has hinted at a more multilateral policy with an enhanced role for the United Nations in the wake of the Iraq disaster.

The Prime Minister admitted the special relationship had damaged him personally because of Iraq, but said Britain should not "drift" into giving it up because of hostile public opinion. "I am the person who above all can give evidence as to the difficulty and sometimes the political penalty you pay for a close relationship with the US, but we shouldn't give that up in any set of circumstances," he said. Mr Blair told the Liaison Committee of senior MPs that the links were an advantage rather than a problem for Britain in the Middle East. "The relationship with America is what opens lots of doors everywhere, including the Middle East. For better or worse, this country for the last 10 years has been right at the heart of every single major international agenda - whether it is terrorism, climate change, Africa, whatever it is," he said.

"At the G8 [summit] at Gleneagles [in 2005], we put Africa and climate change on the map. In my view, without the strong relationship with the US, we would never have had those two issues on the agenda in that way."

Defending the use of "hard" or military power, he said: "You have to be prepared in these circumstances to be engaged with hard power where it is right and necessary to do so. You only get the ability to use 'soft' power properly if you are prepared to do the other difficult things." In a sideswipe at countries like France, he said some nations had "retreated" from being ready to use "hard" power.

Labour MPs reacted with disbelief to Mr Blair's claims about what the relationship with America had achieved since 1997. Peter Kilfoyle, a former defence minister, said: "It is delusional. It could be self-justification. It is a special relationship in one sense - it is one-way traffic. In the depths of night, he must realise how very wrong he has judged where Britain's national interests lie."

Alan Simpson, the MP for Nottingham South, said: "This is the politics of dangerous self-delusion. Even the White House laughs at the notion that Britain has influence over American foreign policy. The only door Bush opens at the moment is the one marked 'exit.' He [Mr Blair] has clearly entered the David Icke phase of his political career."

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "Tony Blair talks about his closeness with the United States with regards to climate change and poverty in Africa. But there is not much to show for it." He questioned the value of the relationship when it had taken America so long to release the video tape of the "friendly-fire" incident in which L/Cpl Matty Hull was killed in Iraq in 2003.

Mr Blair played down speculation that military action might be taken to stop Iran's nuclear programme.

On climate change, the Prime Minister said there was a "changing mood" in the US and said it was "possible" but "not yet probable" that there would be a new global agreement when the Kyoto protocol expired in 2012.

    Blair's defence of special relationship with US has hollow ring, I, 7.2.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article2245133.ece

Blair quizzed again

as cash for honours

consumes Labour

· Police imposed news blackout on PM interview
· Questions linked to Levy and perversion of justice

Friday February 2, 2007
Guardian
Patrick Wintour, political editor

Detectives investigating the cash for honours affair demanded that the prime minister maintain total secrecy over their decision to conduct a second interview with him to see if they could expose Lord Levy, Labour's chief fundraiser, giving misleading or contradictory evidence.

Mr Blair was interviewed as a witness for 45 minutes last Friday, four days before Lord Levy was arrested and questioned on suspicion of perverting the course of justice. No 10 only revealed yesterday that Mr Blair had also been seen again, 24 hours after police gave it clearance to do so.

The demand for secrecy reveals the degree to which trust between No 10 - and its allies - and the Metropolitan police has eroded. It also suggests the police believe it is possible to pin charges of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice against some of Mr Blair's closest allies.

Relations between Mr Blair and Lord Levy are said at Westminster to be "up and down". Neither Lord Levy, Downing Street nor the police would comment last night on a BBC report that the peer was quizzed about notes of meetings with senior No 10 staff when honours were discussed.

Mr Blair was told last Friday that he must not divulge either the fact of the interview or its details to anyone but his tightest circle. His chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, and his director of government relations, Ruth Turner, both the subject of police inquiries, were not told.

A police statement said yesterday : "The prime minister has been interviewed briefly to clarify points emerging from the ongoing investigation. He was interviewed as a witness, not as a suspect, and cooperated fully."

With senior cabinet members still expecting that the prime minister will not be charged, there is as yet no high-level ministerial, or senior backbench call for Mr Blair to stand down. However, both Harriet Harman and Hazel Blears expressed concern that it was harming the government's relationship with voters. Ms Blears said in an interview on BBC2's Newsnight: "Inevitably, when you have this kind of thing going on for months and months, it does have a corrosive effect. This whole affair has overshadowed our domestic agenda: it is quite difficult to get your message across."

Ms Harman told BBC1's Question Time: "It has eroded trust and it's been an unfortunate, to say the least, situation."

The Conservative leader, David Cameron, said Mr Blair needed to realise "it is over". He added: "I look along the front bench and I see the health secretary and I wonder is she thinking about the current crisis facing our health service or is she wondering if she will have a job in four months' time?

"I think about our defence secretary, who should be concerned with the current problems facing our troops in Iraq, but is he wondering whether he will have a job when Gordon Brown takes office?"

No 10 is desperate for the investigation to end, one way or another, and for a decision to be made by the Crown Prosecution Service on whether charges should be brought. But it is possible the police will not close their inquiry until March, dragging the damaging affair into the Scottish, Welsh and English election campaigns.

The leader of the house, Jack Straw, said: "In the special and particular circumstances in which a request was made by the police that nothing should be divulged about this interview, I am absolutely clear that this is acceptable practice."

Mr Blair's second interview occurred hours before he flew to Davos, Switzerland, where he received a standing ovation for a speech on climate change, Africa, trade talks and globalisation.

Blair quizzed again as cash for honours consumes Labour, G, 2.2.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/funding/story/0,,2004269,00.html

Steve Richards:

Darkness descends

to engulf Blair's denouement

Published: 31 January 2007
The Independent

The darkness that marks Tony Blair's final months gets darker still. The cash for honours investigation began as a serious diversion. It ends by threatening to overwhelm all other matters, reducing serious policy issues to minor matters as Downing Street languishes in a fearful gloom.

Let us separate the substance of the police investigation from the politics. No one knows for sure what evidence the police have got, and what they suspect has been kept from them. Evidently, they sense a cover-up of significance. Lord Levy is the second ally of Blair's to be arrested on suspicion of a conspiracy to pervert the cause of justice. He denies the allegation. So did Ruth Turner, Blair's senior aide who was arrested on the same grounds less than a fortnight ago. Downing Street insiders are adamant that they have co-operated fully with the inquiry. Evidently, the senior officers involved have their doubts - apparently they are as focused now on what they suspect to be a cover-up as they are on the original allegations.

While it is not clear how the investigation will end, the political repercussions are immediate. The investigation is sapping morale in Downing Street at a time when those around Blair were already facing the challenging and unsatisfying prospect of working for a Prime Minister who will be gone before very long. When I met a Blair ally recently, who had left Downing Street recently for a new job, I asked him how he felt about his new vocation. Without hesitation he referred to his previous job: "I feel guilty for leaving them at such a time." He was referring to the nightmare of the police investigation.

The consequences spread beyond the traumatised Downing Street entourage. Before yesterday's developments, some Labour MPs were stirring, wondering how much damage Blair is doing to his party by staying on until July. Already all the key players are struggling to adapt to the uniquely awkward political choreography. Gordon Brown waits, wondering how much he should say about his future plans during this strange interim. Cabinet ministers look towards their next boss while implementing Blair's policies. Senior civil servants await a Brown administration, too. Meanwhile, the Conservatives maintain a lead in the polls.

Into this unprecedented situation comes the most extraordinary wild card. As Blair insists unrealistically that he has still much to do in the time left to him as Prime Minister, a police investigation intensifies. He has been a leader with a remarkable ability to compartmentalise, to focus on the issue in hand.

But the latest twists of the investigation must test even his powers of concentration. He is at the centre of the drama, the leader of the party with the powers of patronage that are being subjected to the most intense scrutiny. Others have been arrested, but this is about the Prime Minister as the space around him to act politically has narrowed sharply already.

The investigation could end without a dramatic denouement, in which case the police officers will have many questions to answer. But for now, the inquiry is making Blair's final days almost impossibly bleak.

    Steve Richards: Darkness descends to engulf Blair's denouement, I, 31.1.2007, http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/steve_richards/article2201077.ece

Levy arrested over perversion of justice

Police detain Blair's chief fundraiser for second time

Wednesday January 31, 2007
Guardian
Sandra Laville and Will Woodward

Tony Blair's chief fundraiser and confidant Lord Levy was arrested for a second time yesterday on suspicion of perverting the course of justice over his role in the cash for honours affair.

The dramatic development suggests Lord Levy, who answers directly to the prime minister, is suspected of allegedly lying or withholding evidence from detectives as part of a coverup. Police are known to be following a trail of encrypted emails and electronic trails on computer hard drives as part of their 10-month inquiry.

Scotland Yard detectives, who are investigating whether money was donated to the Labour party in exchange for peerages, placed the peer under arrest when he went to a central London police station to answer bail yesterday.

Perverting the course of justice involves attempts to put obstacles in the way of police. It is considered an extremely serious offence by the courts. The maximum jail penalty is life although in practice no one has ever been jailed for more than 10 years in the last century.

A spokesman for Lord Levy said he "completely denies any allegations of wrongdoing whatsoever. Lord Levy went to the police station today as asked. He was interviewed again. He left the police station in the early afternoon and since there is a continuing investigation he will not make any further comments at this time." The peer was released on bail last night pending further inquiries.

Government sources were also bullish about the development. As pressure mounted on No 10, senior ministers expressed anger and frustration about the length of the police investigation and a belief that it is time to put up or shut up.

A government source said: "This has now been going on a year and questions need to be asked whether there is or isn't sufficient information." Scotland Yard has, however, has repeatedly defended the integrity of its inquiry.

Downing Street refused to comment on Lord Levy's re-arrest, but the development will heighten speculation that Mr Blair - who has already been questioned as a witness - may be seen again by detectives before they conclude their inquiry.

No 10 pointedly referred reporters back to Mr Blair's defence of his friend and Middle East envoy on December 18 when the prime minister stated he had "performed an excellent job as my envoy in very difficult circumstances". Lord Levy, 62, was first arrested in July last year and questioned under the Honours Act 1925 and the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. Food tycoon Sir Gulam Noon, who was originally nominated for a peerage by Labour, has alleged to police that Lord Levy suggested he make a loan to the party in the runup to the 2005 general election and that it need not be disclosed.

Lord Levy was questioned again in September last year and denied any wrongdoing. His arrest yesterday came two weeks after senior No 10 aide Ruth Turner was arrested at her home in a dawn raid, also under suspicion of perverting the course of justice. John Yates, deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan police, who is leading the inquiry, is using new US software which scans hard drives and flags up deleted email exchanges. .

Labour MP John McDonnell, who plans to stand for the Labour leadership, said last night: "Increasingly, the Labour party leadership appears to be in disarray over this issue. The police clearly have suspicions that all the relevant information is not being provided to them."

Recent speculation that the police were interested in a handwritten note from Tony Blair has been denied by the prime minister's official spokesman. Downing Street also denied a report that police were investigating the existence of a second computer system in No 10 which contained encrypted emails.

    Levy arrested over perversion of justice, G, 31.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/funding/story/0,,2002460,00.html

'Cash-for-honours' timeline

Tuesday January 30, 2007
Staff and agencies
Guardian Unlimited

March 2006: Metropolitan police begin inquiry.

April 13: Des Smith, a headteacher, is the first person arrested. Mr Smith, who until January was an adviser to the body that finds wealthy sponsors for the government's city academies, had allegedly suggested that backers of a flagship Labour schools policy could expect to be rewarded with honours. His lawyers later say he "categorically denies" the allegations.

July 12: Labour's chief fundraiser, Lord Levy, is arrested for the first time. He is later re-interviewed and re-bailed without charge and insists he is innocent.

July 13: The Commons Public Administration Committee calls for tighter checks on the propriety of all higher honours awards.

July 14: It emerges that police officers have already questioned at least two government ministers. The former Labour party chairman, Ian McCartney, now a junior trade and industry minister, and the science minister, Lord Sainsbury (who has since stepped down), are among 48 people interviewed by this stage.

July 16: Tony Blair acknowledges a "real problem" with the public's perception of the "cash-for-honours" row but says he believes that nobody in the Labour party has broken the rules.

August 23: Political parties generally are urged to improve their disclosure of financial support after more than £300,000 of donations were declared late. The Electoral Commission says late reporting is "not acceptable".

September 20: Sir Christopher Evans, the biotech mogul who made a £1m loan to Labour, is the third person to be arrested. He is bailed without charge. The next day he says he is "extremely shocked and dismayed" and insists: "I have done nothing wrong."

September 28: It emerges that Mr Blair's director of government relations, Ruth Turner, has been questioned under caution. She is believed to have been asked about emails and documents relating to the inquiry.

October 1: Bob Edmiston, the leading Tory donor and car importer, is reported by the Times to have been questioned under caution.

October 17: Voters want to see donations to political parties capped as part of reforms in the wake of recent scandals, says research by the Electoral Commission.

October 23: Michael Howard, the former Conservative leader, says that he agreed to be interviewed by police investigating the "cash-for-honours" affair. He has not been arrested or questioned under caution.

November 4: Mr McNeil calls for the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, to distance himself from the inquiry following reports that he might be responsible for making the final decision over whether criminal charges are brought. Mr McNeil says that there is an "obvious conflict of interest" given Lord Goldsmith's political links to the prime minister, but the attorney general refuses to rule out having the final say.

November 6: The prime minister refuses to comment on the row over Lord Goldsmith. Meanwhile Scotland Yard and Downing Street will not comment on reports that his chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, is to be interviewed under caution.

November 8: It emerges that virtually all ministers who served in the cabinet in the run-up to the 2005 general election have been contacted by Scotland Yard, asking them to declare formally in writing what they knew about the loans.

They included such senior figures as the chancellor, Gordon Brown, the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, and the communities secretary, Ruth Kelly, but not the prime minister himself. Alan Milburn, the former health secretary, also reveals that he has been questioned over the affair.

It also emerges that the current health secretary, Patricia Hewitt, was questioned.

November 10: Lord Sainsbury resigns as science minister but says that his decision is for personal reasons and has nothing to do with the inquiry.

November 12: Mr Prescott declares himself satisfied with the police's conduct as Downing Street rejects reports that officials at No 10 have complained about how it has been handled.

November 16: In a letter updating MPs, Acting Assistant Commissioner John Yates says the investigation has turned up "significant and valuable material" and that "considerable progress continues to be made".

He reveals that his Scotland Yard team has conducted 90 interviews so far - 35 from the Labour party, 29 from the Conservatives, four from the Liberal Democrats, and 22 people not linked to any particular party.

Mr Yates tells the House of Commons public administration select committee that he hopes to be able to send a file of evidence to the CPS in January. It also emerges that the Labour chair, Hazel Blears, met Mr Yates, who is leading the inquiry. Her spokesman said it was a meeting "to keep her up to date" with the matter.

November 18: Mr Yates, it emerges, had been asked by the committee to beef up his letter to them detailing the progress of his inquiry after an initial submission was considered "too cursory". It also becomes clear the letter was published at the request of the MPs.

November 20: Lord Goldsmith says he does not expect to be interviewed by detectives as he had not been involved in any Labour party fundraising. "I am not going to be involved in the process - with fundraising issues - that they are concerned with, so I can't see why I should be," he says.

November 21: It is reported that Des Smith, who remains on police bail, has been given his laptop computer back by police. Labour also complains to the BBC after it emerged journalists were offered £100 "bounty" payments for stories on the cash-for-honours affair.

November 22: Ms Hewitt has a "brief" interview with the police, talking to them as a witness. She is believed to have faced questioning over donations made to her constituency party in Leicester West by curry tycoon Sir Gulam Noon - one of those who later loaned the party money and was blocked for a peerage.

December 14: Downing Street announces that the prime minister has been questioned by police. He was not under caution.

January 19, 2007: MPs on the Constitutional Affairs Committee revealed evidence showing that the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, overruled the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, in refusing to stand aside from the cash-for-peerages probe.

January 19: Ruth Turner, No 10's head of government relations, arrested under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925, and also on suspicion of perverting the course of justice.

January 30: Lord Levy is arrested for a second time, this trime on suspicion of conspiring to pervert the course of justice

    'Cash-for-honours' timeline, G, 30.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/funding/story/0,,1972222,00.html

4pm

Blair heralds climate change breakthrough


Saturday January 27, 2007
Press Association
Observer.co.uk

Tony Blair addresses the World Economic Forum in Davos. Photograph: AP

Tony Blair said today that the world could be on the verge of a major breakthrough on long-term climate change goals.
In a keynote address to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the prime minister said that a "quantum shift" in the attitude of the US combined with the German presidency of the European Union presents an opportunity to agree the principles of a post-2012 agreement.

He promised to work with President Bush and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, towards a more "radical" and "comprehensive" successor to the Kyoto protocol during his final months in office.

Mr Blair said: "I believe we are potentially on the verge of a breakthrough."

He praised Chancellor Merkel's focus on climate change during her EU presidency and India and China's engagement with the G8.

Turning to the United States, he said: "The mood in the US is in the process of a quantum shift.

"The president's State of the Union address built on his 'addicted to oil' speech last year and set the first US targets for a reduction in petrol consumption.

"The German presidency gives us an opportunity to agree at least the principles of a new binding international agreement to come into effect when Kyoto expires in 2012 but one which is more radical than Kyoto and more comprehensive.

"More comprehensive because it includes America, China and India.

"It is a prize of tantalising significance and I think it is possible."

The prime minster's official spokesman said Mr Blair was not trying to secure the detail but simply the framework of a post-Kyoto agreement at the next G8 summit in June.

But he would insist that it must include goals on the stabilisation of emissions, a global cap and trade scheme and increased investment in clean technology.

Mr Blair will also talk today about trade and Africa, on which he held talks with foreign leaders, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates and U2 singer Bono last night.

Mr Blair used a round-table discussion to warn that failure to make progress on stalled world trade talks would be catastrophic for international commerce and Africa.

Last night he also urged the world's richest countries to live up to the promises they made on Africa at the 2005 G8 summit in Gleneagles.

    Blair heralds climate change breakthrough, O, 27.1.2007, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2000243,00.html

1.15pm update

Blair: I have always backed gay adoption

Thursday January 25, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Deborah Summers and agencies

Tony Blair today sought to quell the row over gay adoptions, insisting he was "committed to finding a way through this sensitive and difficult decision".

In a statement released by 10 Downing Street, Mr Blair insisted he had always personally been in favour of the right of gay couples to adopt, adding that proposals to resolve the dispute will be brought forward next week.

Reports today suggested that Mr Blair had "caved in" to cabinet colleagues who do not want to see any exemption for Catholic adoption agencies from new regulations that will require them to offer children to same-sex couples.

In his statement the prime minister said: "I have always personally been in favour of the right of gay couples to adopt.

"Our priority will always be the welfare of the child."

Alluding to a compromise deal, the prime minister said he would work to find a solution that ended discrimination against gay people and also ensured the protection of vulnerable children receiving help with adoption and after-care from Catholic agencies.

Mr Blair said: "There is one last aspect within the new regulations to resolve and it concerns adoption.

He added: "Both gay couples and the Catholic agencies have a high level of success in adopting hard-to-place children. It is for that reason we have taken time to ensure we get these regulations right.

"How do we protect the principle of ending discrimination against gay people and at the same time protect those vulnerable children who at the present time are being placed through, and after-care provided by, Catholic agencies, who everyone accepts do a great job with some of the most disturbed youngsters?

"We will announce a decision next week and then vote, probably next month.

"I am committed to finding a way through this sensitive and difficult decision."

The new regulations introduced by last year's Equality Act are due to come into force on April 6 and will make it illegal to discriminate against gay people in the provision of goods and services. They must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before coming into force.

The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor - backed by his Scottish bishops and Church of England leaders - has called for Catholic adoption agencies to be granted an exemption.

He was accused of blackmail after warning that the agencies, which handle around a third of voluntary sector adoptions, could be forced to close because they would refuse to hand over babies to homosexual couples.

Mr Blair and the communities secretary, Ruth Kelly, were reported to back the exemption but have faced public resistance to it from cabinet colleagues including Lord Falconer, Peter Hain and Alan Johnson.

Unconfirmed reports suggested last night that the opponents of a Catholic exemption had secured agreement from Mr Blair that the church agencies would instead be offered a limited transition period before being required to comply with the anti-discrimination law.

But Mr Blair's official spokesman this morning declined to say whether such a compromise had been reached.

However, sources close to Ms Kelly told Guardian Unlimited that ministers were considering proposals that included allowing adoption agencies a transition period of between six months and three years.

Other proposals were a duty on Catholic agencies to refer gay couples to other adoption organisations who could help them, or to develop affiliations or merge with non-secular agencies.

Ms Kelly is said to be frustrated by "assumptions" in the press that because she was Catholic she was against gay adoption.

"She is a serious, pragmatic politician who leads the department that takes decisions on this," the source said.

"All the way through this she has been trying to find a principled solution to this problem. She is committed to bringing in regulation that outlaws discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation."

The source rejected suggestions Ms Kelly was considering resigning over the matter.

"The issue simply doesn't arise," the source said.

Earlier today the education secretary, Alan Johnson, denied reports that he had led a cabinet revolt on the issue against Mr Blair.

"I didn't lead a movement against anybody," he told BBC Breakfast.

"There was a discussion and a debate in cabinet. I've never seen the case for an exemption. To me this is legislation to prevent discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and you cannot do that and at the same time allow discrimination in one area."

Asked today on BBC Radio 4's Today programme whether he thought the government would resist calls for an exemption, Mr Johnson, the minister for adoption, said: "Yes, I do."

The government made clear there was no case for an exemption when consultation began last year, he said.

"The primary concern, of course, has to be the children concerned in the adoption process and I very much hope the Catholic church does continue to provide the important service that they do.

"But if they don't, I think we can ensure that children are not disadvantaged by that.

"And I cannot see a case for introducing legislation that protects gays and lesbians from discrimination on grounds of their sexual orientation and then allowing in terms, as part of public policy, that discrimination to continue."

Asked whether Mr Blair's view was the same, he said: "Yes, I think it is."

Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris (Oxford West and Abingdon), a member of the National Secular Society, told Today: "In my view, if people want to provide services, or engage in welfare work using state money, or under a system co-ordinated by the state, they have to accept they can't discriminate."

Dr Harris added that, at the same time, such people should not "proselytise" either.

Julian Brazier, the Conservative co-chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on adoption and fostering, said there was not enough evidence to say definitively whether children fared as well with gay parents.

But he added: "Children thrive best when they live with a married couple."

    Blair: I have always backed gay adoption, G, 25.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,1998409,00.html

2.15pm update

Blair rejects call for Iraq withdrawal

Wednesday January 24, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Matthew Tempest, political correspondent

Tony Blair has rejected a call for an October pull-out of UK troops from Iraq - but ducked discussing the issue with MPs at a Commons debate on the conflict.

In a deliberate breach of parliamentary etiquette, the leaders of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties appeared in the chamber - despite Mr Blair's decision to attend a CBI conference of business leaders in London instead.

William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, called it "unthinkable that an Atlee, a Churchill, a Callaghan or a Thatcher would not be here to debate at a time of war."

Margaret Beckett, the foreign secretary, was left to defend the government's position on Iraq while Downing Street insisted it was normal practice for prime ministers to ignore adjournment debates.

Mrs Beckett - accompanied on the frontbench by only her junior foreign office ministers and the leader of the house, Jack Straw - was interrupted over 20 times during her half-hour speech.

Earlier, at PMQs, Mr Blair rejected a call from the Liberal Democrats to set an October deadline for pulling out of Iraq - the first time the anti-war Lib Dems have set a concrete timetable for withdrawal.

Mr Blair pledged to "see the mission through and complete it successfully" and branded Sir Menzies Campbell's plan "deeply irresponsible".

Sir Menzies, setting out new Lib Dem policy, had said: "I think we should spend the next three months discussing with our regional allies and with coalition allies what we propose to do, but between May 1 and the end of October we should conduct a staged withdrawal of United Kingdom forces."

The SNP pointed out that Mr Blair had declared last year he would debate Iraq "anytime, anywhere".

Number 10 has promised that Mr Blair will make a statement about UK troop operations in the south of Iraq in the aftermath of the ongoing "Operation Sinbad".

During the debate, Mrs Beckett denied that Iraq had reached a state of civil war - despite civilian casualties now running at more than 100 a day - and repeatedly warned Iran and Syria off intervening in the situation.

She stressed that Mr Blair would address MPs when the country reached "a political turning point" and insisted that no other PM had exposed themselves to more parliamentary scrutiny.

Mrs Beckett repeated assurances that British troops could be in a position to hand over Basra by the spring, and said it was hoped lead responsibility in all 18 of Iraq's provinces would be handed over to the country's security forces by November.

But she stressed that was "dependent on circumstances at the time".

The foreign secretary warned Tehran it faced a choice between cooperation and "political, economic and cultural isolation".

Asked about potential attacks on Iran, Mrs Beckett refused to repeat an earlier assertion from Jack Straw that it would be inconceivable.

She said: "Nobody is contemplating such action and I sincerely hope there never comes a time when anybody is."

But she added: "It's not easy to make friends with somebody trying to spit in your eye."

The debate comes hours after the US president, George Bush, warned in his State of the Union address that the consequences of failure in Iraq would be "grievous and far reaching".

And it comes as Britain appears to be preparing to scale down its commitment to the country, just as Mr Bush is planning a "surge" of 21,500 additional American troops.

Peace protestors from Stop the War were outside parliament for the debate, which began after PMQs.

Andrew Murray, chairman of the Stop The War Coalition, said: "This is an extraordinary sense of priority. The prime minister should be in the Commons to explain his disastrous Middle East policy to MPs rather than discussing job cuts with employers."

Labour MP John McDonnell, who has announced he will stand for the Labour leadership when Mr Blair stands down, said he was "shocked" at Mr Blair's priorities.

"He cannot find time to attend a debate in the House of Commons about a policy that is undermining his legacy, preferring to speak to big business. It is a shocking negation of his responsibilities."

Today's debate is the first occasion MPs have discussed Iraq in government time since the Butler report into the failings of pre-war intelligence was published in July 2004.

A total of 130 British service personnel have died in Iraq since the March 2003 invasion. A UN estimate for Iraqi civilian deaths in 2006 put the figure at 34,000, while an authoritative Lancet study found that the total Iraqi death toll since 2003 was 655,000.

    Blair rejects call for Iraq withdrawal, G, 24.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1997482,00.html

1pm update

Blair defends ministers' prisons advice

Wednesday January 24, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Hélène Mulholland and agencies

Tony Blair insisted today that a letter sent to judges by senior ministers urging them to find alternative punishments to prison was "simply reminding the courts of existing sentencing policy".

The prime minister was forced on the defensive by David Cameron after the government urged judges and magistrates to jail only the most dangerous and persistent criminals in a bid to ease prison overcrowding.

Pressed on the matter today at prime minister's question time, Mr Blair said that ministers had merely reminded judges and magistrates of the sentencing options available to them in the courts. Challenged by the Tory leader to give an assurance there would be no more early-release schemes to ease the pressure on prison places, even if that meant using prison ships and extra prison wards, Mr Blair said: "All options, of course, are kept under consideration all the time."

Mr Blair rounded on the Tories for voting against extra investment for prisons in the past.

The parliamentary spat took place after it emerged that Mr Reid, Lord Falconer, the lord chancellor, and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, last night wrote to judges and magistrates to call for alternative punishments to be meted out because prisons are too full. The letter is understood to be the first in a series of measures designed to ease prison overcrowding over the coming weeks and months

The prison population of England and Wales is hovering around its capacity of about 80,000 places.

The Home Office revealed today that it had reopened a prison wing which was closed at the weekend after being condemned as unfit for human habitation.

A spokeswoman said the A-wing at HMP Norwich would be brought back into short-term use to house prisoners on remand from the courts.

The BBC has also reported that prison spaces are in such short supply that about 480 people had to stay in police cells on Monday, and that cells in the Old Bailey - the Central Criminal Court in London - were also made available this week.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said earlier today: "It is outrageous that sentences are being dictated by the prison capacity and not by the crime committed.

"Yet again we see the public are being put at risk by the failure of ministers.

"Offenders who should be sent to jail won't be, and all because the government failed to listen to our and other calls to address the lack of prison capacity over the last few years."

Nick Clegg, the home affairs spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, said that the situation ranked as the "worst" in a litany of government failures.

Mr Clegg said that the government had only itself to blame for a "lamentable state of affairs".

"A mixture of arrogance and incompetence led the government to ignore warnings about prison numbers, which were first expressed several years ago.

"There is a strong case to review the mix of offenders sent to prison, but these short-term panic fixes will provide nothing but temporary sticking-plaster solutions to a much deeper crisis."

The Home Office has defended the letter to magistrates and judges, saying that it was a necessary stopgap measure before a further 8,000 prison places begin to become available in the spring.

A spokesman for the Home Office said that "a few hundred" of these places would be available by spring, with all 8,000 ready by 2009.

Mr Reid said: "It is necessary to a civilised society that those who are a danger to our society are put away.

"The public have a right to expect protection from violent and dangerous offenders.

"Prisons are an expensive resource that should be used to protect the public and to rehabilitate inmates and stop them reoffending.

"However, we should not be squandering taxpayers' money to monitor non-dangerous and less serious offenders."

A Home Office spokesman said: "We are accelerating accommodation arrangements where possible and examining all options for extra capacity in the prison estate as a matter of urgency."

Ken Jones, the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, insisted that part of the jail overcrowding problem was down to police catching so many serious offenders.

Mr Jones said: "There have been falls in those imprisoned and remanded for less serious crimes, for example motoring offences.

"Our priority is public protection and, although there is a case for a wider debate about the use of custody, evidence suggests that it is the more serious offenders that we are bringing to justice who are driving up the prison population numbers."

But the Prison Reform Trust, a pressure group, blamed overcrowding on "scaremongering tactics" by ministers.

The group's director, Juliet Lyon, said: "Ministers are right to call at last for jails to be used more sparingly, not because they are full to bursting, but because the government's own scaremongering tactics have blocked prison beds with petty offenders, vulnerable women and children, addicts and the mentally ill.

"The government has been guilty of criminal negligence to allow prisons to get into such a terrible mess without intervening earlier in a planned way."

Paul Cavadino, the chief executive of Nacro, the crime reduction charity, said: "Courts should only be imprisoning dangerous or persistent offenders in any event, not just at times of extreme overcrowding."

He added: "Prisons cannot do an effective job of rehabilitating offenders if they are constantly lurching from one overcrowding crisis to another."

    Blair defends ministers' prisons advice, NYT, 24.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,1997589,00.html

Police go to war

over No 10 honours arrest

Sunday January 21, 2007
The Observer
Mark Townsend and Gaby Hinsliff

Downing street was plunged into a full-scale war with the police yesterday after senior officers hit back at criticism of the way the cash-for-peerages investigation is being handled.

They responded after Cabinet Minister Tessa Jowell expressed bewilderment at the manner in which Ruth Turner, Number 10's director of devolvement relations, was arrested at home at dawn - while former Home Secretary David Blunkett accused police of 'theatrics'. Yesterday Scotland Yard made clear its anger at what it sees as undue political pressure. Sir Chris Fox, the former president of the Association of Chief Police Officers who remains close to Scotland Yard, accused political critics of 'scheming to discredit a very important inquiry'. Chief constables feared a potential threat to police independence, he added.

His intervention came as it emerged that rebel Labour MPs are actively discussing raising a delegation of senior backbenchers to go to the Prime Minister and appeal for him to quit early.
A senior Cabinet minister told The Observer that Tony Blair would go if he personally believed he had begun to harm the party, but would not be forced out.

Fox said the multiple attack from Labour figures was 'worrying' because it suggested co-ordination. Yet police had simply followed standard practice, he said. 'If you have a suspect on suspicion of perverting the course of justice there is no point in making an appointment for them to see you because - guess what? - if they are a real suspect, then the evidence will disappear.

'The British public expect the police to investigate this and chief constables particularly - and I have spoken to them about it - I think we are entering a very important moment. If the police haven't got the courage or the conviction to get on and do their job independently, then we are in for a very rocky ride with our politicians.'

Fox said John Yates, the Yard's Deputy Assistant Commissioner leading the inquiry, would not take such steps without good reason 'rather than a case of being theatrical or catching the public eye'. Politicians who did not like what had happened 'should go on police training courses because they don't know what they are talking about,' he added.

Last night there were signs of the government backpedalling. Jowell told the BBC that, while she stood by her comments, she was not criticising the police inquiry. Ken Livingstone, the London Mayor, refused to comment on the grounds that he will shortly be setting the Met's budget, and Home Secretary John Reid also declined to get involved.

Len Duvall, Labour chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority, went further urging colleagues to remember that 'no one in this country is above the law'. He added: 'As chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority I must be seen never to seek to manipulate or pressurise senior officers in the Met on any operational inquiry. 'Those who have spoken out over the past 24 hours about the way in which police are conducting this inquiry may well wish to reflect on what they have said.'

The cash-for-honours inquiry is now set to be raised at this week's meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party, with some backbenchers saying that if the police recommend charges against Turner, Downing Street chief of staff Jonathan Powell, or Downing Street director of political operations John McTernan, the Prime Minister's own position would become untenable.

'He should be packing his bags if there are charges inside Number 10,' said one senior backbencher.

However, they may struggle to get the support to confront Blair effectively. One Cabinet colleague said Blair would go of his own volition if he felt it necessary. 'The stakes are immeasurably high. But what he will never do is to be pushed. About the only circumstances in which he would say "I will call it a day" is if he really felt he was damaging the party.'

    Police go to war over No 10 honours arrest, O, 21.1.2007, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1995327,00.html

5pm update

Key No 10 aide

arrested in honours inquiry

Friday January 19, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Paul Owen

The "cash-for-honours" inquiry took a dramatic new twist today as a key Downing Street aide was arrested by police.

Ruth Turner, director of government relations, was arrested at her home in London under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 and also on suspicion of perverting the course of justice.

Police said that she was interviewed at a London police station and bailed to return at a later date "pending further enquiries".

In a statement released by No 10, Ms Turner said: "I absolutely refute any allegations of wrongdoing of any nature whatsoever."

A Downing Street spokeswoman said the prime minister had "full confidence" in Ms Turner and that she still remained in her job.

The prime minister, Tony Blair, said, in a statement released by 10 Downing Street: "Ruth is a person of the highest integrity for whom I have great regard and I continue to have complete confidence in her."

The news came as it emerged that the attorney general had overruled one of the prime minister's closest allies, the lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, in refusing to relinquish his right to intervene in the inquiry.

"No other minister, however distinguished or senior, has the ability to bind the attorney general in how he exercises his role," Lord Goldsmith said.

MPs learned of his refusal to stand aside from the proceedings in fresh evidence released by the constitutional affairs committee today.

Lord Falconer had assured the committee that the attorney general would not interfere in the decision of whether to bring prosecutions against anyone in the "cash-for-honours" inquiry.

Andrew Tyrie, a Conservative member of the committee, asked Lord Falconer whether he could "give the public an assurance that the attorney general will not interfere in any way with the conclusions of the DPP [the director of public prosecutions, Ken Macdonald] and that the DPP would be permitted ... to take any decisions for prosecution wholly independent of the attorney general".

Lord Falconer told the committee: "Of course. It's a matter for the DPP and the Crown Prosecution Service to make decisions in relation to this in the normal way and, of course, the attorney general would not interfere in the normal course of decisions being made."

Having then heard Lord Goldsmith make statements suggesting that he reserved the right to involve himself in such a decision, the committee wrote to the lord chancellor for clarification.

Both the lord chancellor and Lord Goldsmith then wrote back to the committee.

Lord Goldsmith told them: "I know the lord chancellor well understands that he was not in a position to give an 'assurance', as you have termed it, as to how I would act."

The attorney general's personal consent is required to proceed with prosecutions for certain types of offences, including corruption.

In a letter to Dominic Grieve, the shadow attorney general, in November, Lord Goldsmith said: "In such cases the need for my consent (or that of the solicitor general) is an essential legal condition. It is not one which can be avoided."

In a letter to Alan Beith, the chairman of the constitutional affairs committee, Lord Goldsmith said that "the doctrine of collective [cabinet] responsibility does not apply to such decisions".

Asked why the committee had chosen to release the evidence today, a spokeswoman said: "In this case, as in many others, I am afraid it is not strategic, it just depends on when the committee meets and agrees it and then how long it takes to physically publish."

The constitutional affairs committee has been investigating the attorney general's constitutional role regarding this and other matters since December 21.

It is due to take oral evidence in February.

In a statement, the police described the arrest as a "new development", adding that "additional investigation would be required before a final file [on the case] can be submitted to the CPS".

MPs had expected the file to be submitted this month, according to the Press Associaton news agency.

In December, Mr Blair became the first serving prime minister to be interviewed by police as part of a criminal investigation.

He was interviewed as a witness and not as a potential suspect.

The Scotland Yard investigation was sparked by claims early last year that wealthy Labour backers were being rewarded with seats in the House of Lords in return for providing secret loans.

The scope of the inquiry was then widened to cover similar claims about the Conservatives.

Others arrested so far in connection with the inquiry have included Labour's unofficial fundraising chief, Lord Levy, with many others questioned.

However, so far there have been no charges.

The head of the public standards watchdog attacked Labour and the Tories yesterday over the £30m of loans used to fund their general election campaigns.

Sir Alistair Graham said: "I have no doubt, when these loans were being made, people thought 'Hopefully we will be able to lengthen the length of time over which the loan is repaid or we may be able to translate it into a donation'."

    Key No 10 aide arrested in honours inquiry, G, 19.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/funding/story/0,,1994500,00.html

MI6 and Blair at odds

over Saudi deals

No national security issue says agency

Tuesday January 16, 2007
Guardian
David Leigh,
Richard Norton-Taylor

and Rob Evans

Britain's secret intelligence service, MI6, has challenged the government's claim that a major corruption inquiry into Saudi Arabian arms deals was threatening national security.

The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, told parliament before Christmas that the intelligence agencies "agreed with the assessment" of Tony Blair that national security was in jeopardy because the Saudis intended to pull out of intelligence cooperation with Britain. But John Scarlett, the head of MI6, has now refused to sign up to a government dossier which says MI6 endorses this view.

Whitehall sources have told the Guardian that the statement to the Lords was incorrect. MI6 and MI5 possessed no intelligence that the Saudis intended to sever security links. The intelligence agencies had been merely asked whether it would be damaging to UK national security if such a breach did happen. They replied that naturally it would.

The issue has now come to a head because ministers are under pressure at an international meeting today to justify why they terminated an important corruption investigation into the arms company BAE Systems.

In a controversial move last month, Tony Blair ordered the Serious Fraud Office inquiry to be halted, and said he took the responsibility for doing so, after BAE lobbied him that it might otherwise lose a lucrative Saudi order for more arms sales. The decision was condemned by MPs and anti-corruption campaigners, and is now the subject of an inquiry by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which is responsible for rooting out corruption around the world. Britain signed up to its anti-bribery convention which made the payment of bribes a specific criminal offence under UK law in 2002.

The OECD has demanded an explanation of the government's decision to abruptly close down an inquiry which was investigating secret payments made to Saudi royals.

Whitehall officials will be questioned by 35 other governments at the Paris meeting, which can "name and shame" Britain if it finds against them. As part of the government's preparations to provide a justification to the OECD, MI6 was asked to sign up to a dossier which made the claim that MI6 "endorsed" Mr Blair's national security claim, according to those who have seen it.

When it was sent to MI6 headquarters last week, Mr Scarlett, refused. Officials made it clear there were "differences" between the intelligence agencies and the government over the language used by Lord Goldsmith. A source said that Lord Goldsmith's claims to parliament in December "contained quite a degree of conjecture". One official said there was "nothing to suggest" that the Saudis had actually warned "if you continue with this inquiry, we will cut off intelligence".

Asked if the security and intelligence agencies objected to claims that they endorsed the attorney general's statement, an official replied: "Exactly." The language has now been changed.

The dispute echoes the intelligence row about "sexing-up" the Iraq arms dossier, when Mr Scarlett, then head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, was persuaded to endorse false government claims that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Sources close to the intelligence agencies say Mr Scarlett was unwilling to again provide cover for ministers by endorsing another set of controversial government claims.

Yesterday, Elfyn Llwyd, Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader, said: "I am glad that the security services have stuck to their guns and told the truth. This government is getting less and less credible every day".

Lord Goldsmith's version of events has also caused a breach with the SFO. Its director, Robert Wardle, says his team found significant evidence in the Saudi arms inquiry and was hoping to find more from Swiss banks. Lord Goldsmith attempted to persuade MPs that the SFO had found no evidence to justify prosecutions and never would.

    MI6 and Blair at odds over Saudi deals, G, 17.1.2007, http://www.guardian.co.uk/armstrade/story/0,,1991281,00.html

 

Big Brother:

What it really means in Britain today

Published: 15 January 2007
The Independent
By Nigel Morris,
Home Affairs Correspondent
 

Moves to share people's personal details across Whitehall have provoked a civil liberties uproar and accusations that the Government has taken another step towards "a Big Brother state".

Ministers say the scheme - which will be endorsed by Tony Blair today - is aimed at improving public service delivery. But it faced protests that it was dealing another blow to personal privacy by creating a "snooper's charter" and enabling thousands of civil servants to access sensitive information with ease.

Two months ago Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, warned that Britain was "waking up to a surveillance society that is already all around us". But ministers dismiss such fears and are pressing ahead with the world's most ambitious identity scheme, as well as a rapid expansion of the DNA database. Details of all children will be held in a single register to be launched next year, medical records are being transferred to a central NHS database and plans are being examined to track motorists' movements by satellite.

The idea of sharing personal details between departments follows a review of public services designed to make them more efficient. Ministers reached the conclusion that data protection rules limiting access to information about adults were too tight.

John Hutton, the Work and Pensions Secretary, cited an incident yesterday where a bereaved family were contacted 44 times in a six-month period by different parts of his department to confirm details of an accident. Mr Hutton said: "The Government already stores vast amounts of data about individual citizens, but actually doesn't share it terribly intelligently. There is room for improvement."

The Government intends to legislate later this year to ease the curbs on data-sharing between departments. It is also refusing to rule out the idea of a single "super-database", where everything from benefits and pensions records to information on motorists and TV licence payments are stored. More details are expected to be announced by the Prime Minister today.

Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said: "This is an accumulation of our Government's contempt for our privacy. This half-baked proposal would allow an information free-for-all within government - ripe for disastrous errors and ripe for corruption and fraud."

Phil Booth, the national co-ordinator of the anti-ID group No2ID, warned of the danger posed by "the development of government surveillance of the population through computer records". He added: "It can be stopped, if only people stand up and say they have had enough."

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "Blair's Britain now has the most intrusive government in our history. It's time we put a halt to this."

The Tories ridiculed the proposal in the light of the Government's record on managing databases, citing failures in the Sex Offenders Register, the Criminal Records Bureau, and recent problems tracking criminal records from overseas.

David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said the ID cards database was likely to be a "white elephant" costing £20bn, and the money could be better spent on policing or border controls.

Oliver Heald, the shadow Constitutional Affairs Secretary, told the BBC that ministers were "moving one step closer to a Big Brother state". He warned against the Government being able to "set up a database from the cradle to the grave".

He asked: "Are they going to have enough security with this massive new database to ensure it isn't hacked into and that identity theft doesn't occur?"

Ministers are convinced the proposal will win widespread public support, and Mr Blair will announce today that so-called "citizens' panels" will be used to gauge reaction to relaxing privacy procedures. The consultation is due to finish in March with ministers prepared to move swiftly after that to legislate.

The Government has repeatedly argued that the public is prepared to sacrifice small measures of personal liberty in return for improving safeguards against terrorism, crime and identity theft.

Critics say the cumulative effect of such initiatives, as well as the spread of store loyalty cards and Oyster travel cards, is to undermine privacy.

SUPER-COMPUTER

Tony Blair is expected to announce today that sensitive personal data could be swapped by Whitehall departments. Ministers believe restrictions on data-sharing between civil servants are too strict. A 'super-database' or 'super-computer' holding everyone's records would be similar to a planned children's database.

DNA DATABASE

The Prime Minister has suggested that the DNA of every British adult should be stored by the state. The national database already holds 3.7 million samples, 6 per cent of the population, far higher than any other country. More than one million have been taken from people never convicted of an offence.

CCTV

The British are among the world's most observed people. Some 4.2 million closed-circuit television cameras record our every move - one for every 14 people and more per head than any other country in Europe or North America. The average Londoner can be caught on camera 300 times a day.

MEDICAL RECORDS

Millions of medical records are to be transferred to a central NHS database, allowing staff anywhere to access patients' information. People who object will not be able to opt out. The most personal information will be available to hospital managers, IT departments, high street pharmacists and civil servants.

IDENTITY CARDS

The first identity cards will be issued next year to foreign nationals and from 2009 to UK citizens. Anyone who renews a passport will be forced to register and the Government aims to make ID cards compulsory within six years. Fifty-two pieces of information, including fingerprints and iris scans, will be held.

SPY IN THE SKY

Motorists are already monitored through the soaring number of road cameras. In an effort to cut congestion, the Department of Transport is examining plans to use satellite technology to keep tabs on every vehicle's exact movements. Motorists, forced to have a black box fitted in their cars, would be billedfor every journey they make.

Growth of surveillance

1984: DNA fingerprinting method discoverd by accident by Sir Alec Jeffreys

1985: Outdoor CCTV camera erected in Bournemouth

1994: Government paves the way for huge expansion of CCTV

1995: The world's first National DNA Database established in England and Wales.

1999: Tony Blair gives a sample of his DNA

2001: Sir Alec Jeffreys calls for profiles of entire UK population to be held

2004: Number of DNA profiles hits the two million mark

2004: Information Commissonaire Richard Thomas warns that Britain is 'sleepwalking into a surveillance society'

2005: MPs vote to introduce identity cards

2006: National Black Police Assocation call for inquiry into why black people are over represented on DNA database

2006: Identity Cards Act becomes law

2007: Data-sharing by Whitehall departments likely to be introduced

2008: Foreign nationals will have to start supplying fingerprints, eye or facial scans added to a National Identity register

2008: Children's database, covering all under-16s in England and Wales, will be launched

2009: The first biometric identity cards will be issued to British citizens when they renew their passport

2010: NHS Database will store the records of 50 million patients providing details over the internet

2012?: ID cards compulsory

    Big Brother: What it really means in Britain today, I, 15.1.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2154844.ece

Shoot the messenger:

PM blames media for anti-war mood

Published: 13 January 2007
The Independent
By Colin Brown and Kim Sengupta

Tony Blair has turned the blame for his disastrous military campaigns in the Middle East on anti-war dissidents and the media.

Warning it would take the West another 20 years to defeat Islamic terrorism, the Prime Minister used a wide-ranging "swansong" lecture on defence to denounce critics and the media who have been a thorn in his side since the invasion of Iraq.

He also dismissed those - including many defence chiefs - who claimed the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath had fuelled insurgents and terrorism.

The Prime Minister rejected as "ludicrous" the notion that removing two dictatorships in Afghanistan and Iraq and replacing them with a UN-backed process to democracy had made Britain a greater target for international terrorism.

However, Mr Blair's speech last night provoked widespread criticism from MPs and military chiefs.

Speaking to an invited audience of military commanders and academics on board a warship in Plymouth, the Prime Minister disclosed his fears that the West no longer had the stomach for sustained military campaigns. He also appeared to blame the media for the global outrage provoked by the war in Iraq.

"[Islamic terrorists] have realised two things: the power of terrorism to cause chaos, hinder and displace political progress especially through suicide missions; and the reluctance of Western opinion to countenance long campaigns, especially when the account it receives is via a modern media driven by the impact of pictures.

"They now know that if a suicide bomber kills 100 completely innocent people in Baghdad, in defiance of the wishes of the majority of Iraqis who voted for a non-sectarian government, then the image presented to a Western public is as likely to be, more likely to be, one of a failed Western policy, not another outrage against democracy."

Acknowledging the public backlash against the Iraq war, Mr Blair said: "Public opinion will be divided, feel that the cost is too great, the campaign too long, and be unnerved by the absence of 'victory' in the normal way they would reckon it.

But the Prime Minister added: "They will be constantly bombarded by the propaganda of the enemy, often quite sympathetically treated by their own media, to the effect that it's really all 'our', that is the West's fault. That, in turn, impacts on the feelings of our armed forces. They want public opinion not just behind them but behind their mission."

He warned that the terrorists had learnt how to use the media to undermine public opinion. He cited a website, called LiveLeak, showing "gruesome images" of the "reality of war" as the kind of propaganda weapon that was being used by international terrorism.

The Prime Minister's targets also appeared to include military chiefs, such as the former head of the army, General Sir Mike Jackson, who have criticised the Government for failing to look after the soldiers.

"The military and especially their families will feel they are being asked to take on a task of a different magnitude and nature. Any grievances, any issues to do with military life, will be more raw, more sensitive, more prone to cause resentment," he said.

Mr Blair seemed desperate to provide a lasting justification of his support for the US in the "war on terror". The Prime Minister had wanted to use his lecture to start a debate on the future of Britain and its military strength, on "tough" and "soft" defence. Some countries had retreated to peacekeeping while Britain maintained a force to fight wars. "We must do both," he said.

Seeking to stiffen the resolve of the West, he said: "Terrorism cannot be defeated by military means alone but it can't be defeated without it." He added: "The parody of people in my position is of leaders who, gung-ho, launch their nations into ill-advised adventures without a thought for the consequences. The reality is we are those charged with making decisions in this new and highly uncertain world; trying, as best we can, to make the right decision. That's not to say we do so but that is our motivation."

Mr Blair was accused of "delusional ramblings" by John McDonnell, leader of the left-wing Campaign Group of Labour MPs. Alan Simpson, a leading Labour anti-war MP said: "Tony Blair is whingeing about the hundreds of thousands of people like me who opposed the war on Iraq. He totally fails to realise that soldiers and their families blame him for the reckless way he launched an illegal war with no coherent exit strategy."

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell, who also opposed the war, said: "The Prime Minister does not seem to have learnt the lessons of Iraq. Without United Nations authority the military action was illegal and severely damaged Britain's reputation. This will be the Prime Minister's legacy."

Air Marshal Sir John Walker, former head of defence intelligence and deputy chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, said: "This is politics, not morality. The only reason Mr Blair is saying this now is because he cannot airbrush Iraq out of the news. He is talking about renewing the covenant with the armed forces because they are the ones having to bear the fallout from his mistakes."

His attack on the media was "particularly rich coming from a party which made a such a fetish out of spin," added Sir John.

The shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague, said: "This is yet another episode of 'Ten Wasted Years', by Tony Blair. His legacy will be an overstretched army, navy and air force.

"Our servicemen and women want to know what Tony Blair is going to do about the failure to deliver armoured vehicles to protect troops from roadside bombs in Iraq. They want to know when they will have enough helicopters in Afghanistan and when the Hercules transport fleet will get proper protection."

Tony Blair's spin unspun

By Colin Brown

* BLAIR SAYS: "The parody of people in my position is of leaders who, gung-ho, launch their nations into ill-advised adventures without a thought for the consequences."

ANALYSIS: No amount of lectures will erase the fact that Iraq is now a mess because of the failure to plan for the peace after Saddam was toppled, and it has made Iran the dominant force in the region.

* BLAIR SAYS: "Public opinion ... will be constantly bombarded by the propaganda of the enemy ... to the effect that it's really all "our", that is the West's, fault."

ANALYSIS: Mr Blair is losing the propaganda war over Iraq, but blaming the media for covering the reporting of the horror of daily life in Baghdad is a sign of his desperation.

* BLAIR SAYS: "The risk here - and in the US where the future danger is one of isolationism not adventurism - is that the politicians decide it's all too difficult and default to an unstated, passive disengagement, that doing the right thing slips almost unconsciously into doing the easy thing."

ANALYSIS: Mr Blair appears worried that after handing over power to Gordon Brown, his successor may come under pressure to do the "easy thing" and bring the troops home before the 'job is done'.

* BLAIR SAYS: "The extraordinary job that servicemen do needs to be reflected in the quality of accommodation provided for them and their families, at home or abroad. So much of what is written distorts the truth."

ANALYSIS: Mr Blair is clearly irritated not only at the media but also at defence chiefs for criticisms of the "overstretch" of the armed forces.

* BLAIR SAYS: "September 11 wasn't the incredible action of an isolated group. It was the product rather of a worldwide movement, with an ideology based on a misreading of Islam."

ANALYSIS: Mr Blair still linked September 11 with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. But there is no evidence that Iraq was used as a training ground for terrorism. It is now.

    Shoot the messenger: PM blames media for anti-war mood, I, 13.1.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2149762.ece

3pm update

Blair pledges increased military spending

as he defends intervention

Friday January 12, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Deborah Summers and agencies

Tony Blair promised more cash for Britain's armed forces today as he defended his policy of intervention in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

The prime minister pledged to increase government spending on equipment, personnel and living conditions as he embarked on a "hearts-and-minds battle" to convince the country that Britain should remain a major defence power.

In a keynote defence lecture Mr Blair argued that there were two types of nations: "Those who do war fighting and peacekeeping and those who have, effectively, except in the most exceptional circumstances, retreated to the peacekeeping alone."

Mr Blair, speaking on board HMS Albion in Plymouth, added: "Britain does both. We should stay that way."

The speech comes just a day after the US announced it was sending more than 20,000 extra troops to Iraq.

The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, welcomed the move but insisted that the UK had no current plans to follow suit.

Britain has said that it will withdraw "thousands" of troops from Iraq in the coming months, amid claims that the armed services are being "overstretched" by fighting two campaigns, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In November, a National Audit Office report warned that the UK's armed forces were 5,170 under strength and had been operating at or above planned-for levels since 2001.

It said that the strain of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time was one reason for shortages.

The Ministry of Defence acknowledged "additional strains" on staff, but denied forces were overstretched.

Mr Blair said: "It is true that operation commitments are at a higher level than originally planned. Service personnel are working harder and for longer than intended."

The premier admitted that service housing had become a "prominent issue".

"We know there are real problems," he said. But Mr Blair argued that much of what had been written about soldiers' families living in squalor "distorts the truth or greatly embellishes it".

Mr Blair warned that, following the September 11 attacks on New York in 2001, Britain faced an enemy akin to "revolutionary communism in its early and most militant phase".

"A world-wide movement, with an ideology based on a misreading of Islam... Its belief system may be utterly reactionary, but its methods are terrifyingly modern," he said.

Mr Blair warned that the battle to defeat this new threat would be long.

"It has taken a generation for the enemy to grow. It will, in all probability take a generation to defeat."

Mr Blair said his choice for Britain's armed forces was for them to prepare to engage in a "difficult, tough, challenging campaign".

"To be war-fighters as well as peacekeepers."

To make that choice, it was important that the covenant between the armed forces, the government and people was renewed.

"For our part, in government, it will mean increased expenditure on equipment, personnel and the conditions of our armed forces, not in the short run but for the long term," Mr Blair said.

"On the part of the military, they need to accept that in a volunteer armed force, conflict and therefore casualty may be part of what they are called upon to face.

"On the part of the public, they need to be prepared for the long as well as the short campaign, to see our participation alongside allies ... as a necessary engagement in order for us to protect our security and advance our interests and values in the modern world." Mr Blair concluded by saying that the world had changed and we had to change with it.

"I have set out the choice I believe we should make. I look forward to the debate," he said.

Earlier, Mr Blair was warned that Britain could not afford to be a "mini-America", intervening around the world

Lord Garden, a former assistant chief of defence staff now a Liberal Democrat defence spokesman, said that the country would have to divert a higher proportion of national income to defence if it wanted to sustain the current level of operations over the long term.

"If you want to be able to do everything, be a mini-America, so you can do high-intensity conflict, go everywhere where there are international problems, you really need to scale up by quite a large amount," he told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

"I don't think that we can afford to. America is spending half a trillion dollars a year, 10 times what we spend. They spend more on research than we spend on defence."

Lord Garden accused Mr Blair of trying to pre-empt the chancellor, Gordon Brown, who is expected to succeed him when he steps down as prime minister later this year.

"What he is trying to do is make sure he ties the hands of his successor, Gordon Brown, who has rather different views about Britain's role in the world," he said.

Clare Short, the former international development secretary who quit the Labour party whip to sit as an independent, dismissed the prime minister's speech.

"Blair is delusional. His role has made the world much more dangerous, much more divided, diminished international law, diminished the prospects of the world cooperating in international humanitarian interventions," she told BBC Radio 4's The World At One.

The chairman of the Commons Defence Select Committee, Tory MP James Arbuthnot, gave the speech an "unreserved welcome".

"The prime ninister is recognising both the strain under which the armed forces are operating and the steps needed to put it right," he said.

"What is essential is that the chancellor should now, immediately, endorse what the prime minister is saying."

    Blair pledges increased military spending as he defends intervention, G, 12.1.2007, http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1988945,00.html

Blair says terror battle

will carry on after his departure

January 12, 2007
Times Online
Devika Bhat and agencies

Tony Blair today said that British forces had to continue fighting in order to defeat global terrorism, admitting his choice of foreign policy had been controversial but insisting that military force would continue to be crucial after he had stepped down from office.

Warning that terrorism could take a generation to defeat, the Prime Minister said in a major speech that retreat would nonetheless be a "catastrophe" and that UK forces had to accept that they may encounter "conflict and therefore casualty" as they continued to fight wars to maintain Britain’s influence in the world.

"The battle will be long. It has taken a generation for the enemy to grow. It will, in all probability, take a generation to defeat," he said, adding that if Britain shrank its role to peacekeeping alone, its "reach, effect and influence (would be) qualitatively reduced"

Acknowledging that there was anger and scepticism within the military, he promised that the Government would plough more money into improving conditions, equipment and housing for the Armed Forces.

"In general the British Armed Forces are superbly equipped," he said. "But talk at any length to serving soldiers and there will be amongst the pride, some anger at faulty weapons or ammunition, boots and body armour, the right vehicles or the wrong ones, and the problems of transport to and from the battlefield and home."

"Single living accommodation, in particular, and also a minority of family accommodation is below standard, though being improved.

Speaking on board HMS Albion in Plymouth, Mr Blair said that the covenant between the forces and the public had to be renewed, as soldiers were asked to undertake unprecedented challenges, accepting "that in a volunteer armed force, conflict and therefore casualty may be part of what they are called upon to face."

He called on the public to recognise the importance of Britain’s military campaigns to international security. "They need to be prepared for the long as well as the short campaign, to see our participation alongside allies in such conflict not as an atavistic, misguided attempt to recapture past glories, but as a necessary engagement in order for us to protect our security and advance our interests and values in the modern world."

Since September 11 2001, Mr Blair said, it had become clear that the attacks of that day were not a one-off. "What we face is not a criminal conspiracy or even a fanatical but fringe terrorist organisation," he said.

"It has realised two things: the power of terrorism to cause chaos, hinder and displace political progress, especially through suicide missions; and the reluctance of western opinion to countenance long campaigns, especially when the account it receives is via a modern media driven by the impact of pictures."

He said that the enemy was not a conventional one that could be defeated through conventional means, but insisted that to retreat from the challenge would be a "catastrophe".

"It would strengthen this global terrorism; proliferate it; expand its circle of sympathisers. Given the nature of it and how its roots developed, long before any of the recent controversies of foreign policy, such retreat would be futile."

Mr Blair admitted that soldiers’ feelings were more raw than ever and that the public was "unnerved" by the lack of a clear victory. "For their part, the military and especially their families will feel they are being asked to take on a task of a different magnitude and nature," he said.

"Any grievances, any issues to do with military life, will be more raw, more sensitive, more prone to cause resentment. Public opinion will be divided, feel that the cost is too great, the campaign too long, and be unnerved by the absence of ‘victory’ in the normal way they would reckon it.

Mr Blair blamed the media for what he said was its role in encouraging a negative attitude in the public towards the fight against terrorism. "They [the public] will be constantly bombarded by the propaganda of the enemy, often quite sympathetically treated by their own media, to the effect that it’s really all ‘our’ - that is the West’s – fault," he said.

    Blair says terror battle will carry on after his departure, Ts, 12.1.2007, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2544369,00.html

From the grave and beyond,

Cook swipes at Blair over war

Published: 10 January 2007
The Independent
By Paul Kelbie

The late Robin Cook's role as the leading parliamentary critic of Tony Blair's drive to war in Iraq will be made plain to future generations by a statement on his headstone

As a final rebuke to the Prime Minister from whose government he resigned over the conflict, Cook's gravestone at Grange Cemetery in Edinburgh carries the legend: "I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of Parliament to decide on war." The quotation, taken from his memoir, Point of Departure, was chosen by his widow, Gaynor, and his two sons, Peter and Christopher.

The Livingston MP died aged 59 from a heart attack while walking in the Scottish Highlands 16 months ago. The 5ft 2in headstone also describes the former foreign secretary and leader of the House of Commons as a "parliamentarian and statesman", as well as a "beloved husband" and "much-missed father".

Mr Blair was criticised at the time of Cook's funeral, for failing to attend, despite a big turnout from many senior Labour MPs, including John Prescott and Gordon Brown.

Cook won a standing ovation when he resigned in March 2003 after delivering a withering speech on the Government's decision to go to war without any proof that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

"From the start of the present crisis, I have insisted, as Leader of the House, on the right of this place to vote on whether Britain should go to war," he told MPs. "It has been a favourite theme of commentators that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics. Nothing could better demonstrate that they are wrong than for this House to stop the commitment of troops in a war that has neither international agreement nor domestic support."

He dismissed Mr Blair's claim that the Iraqi dictator had weapons of mass destruction capable of being deployed, and demanded to know: "Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?"

In announcing his intention to vote against the Government Cook, who had spent almost 20 years as a frontbench MP, said he had been left with little alternative but to resign. However two days later, after nine hours of debate and a serious backbench rebellion, the Government won the backing of MPs to send UK troops into Iraq after they voted 396 to 217 against a motion declaring that the case for war "has not yet been established". The former foreign secretary took some consolation that he had at least helped ensure Parliament should vote on the war before troops were committed - an "historic precedent".

Gordon Brown and David Cameron have publicly committed themselves to ensuring Parliament has the final say in future and a House of Lords committee last year recommended enshrining a vote over the declaration of war into parliamentary convention.

"Before the decision to hold a vote on whether to go to war in Iraq, Parliament had never had the right to make a decision. Whatever one's views on the war this is an important constitutional point and a suitable legacy for him," said Alistair Darling, the Trade Secretary and Edinburgh South West MP.

"Everybody accepts that, in the normal course of events, Parliament should have a right to vote on whether UK troops go into war. Gordon Brown and others have said so and I think there is now a political consensus."

No 10 refused to comment on the epitaph. "The Prime Minister paid his tribute to Robin at the time of his death and we have nothing more to say," said Mr Blair's spokesman.

Robin Cook's stand against the decision to go to war

"For the first time in the history of Parliament, the Commons formally took the decision to commit Britain to conflict.

Now that the Commons has established its right to vote on the commitment of British troops to action, no future government will find it easy to take it away again. And one consequence of the controversy over the Government's justification for the war is that next time the case for war will be more thoroughly tested by a more sceptical Commons.

I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of Parliament to decide on war."

From Robin Cook's memoirs, The Point of Departure, published by Simon & Schuster

    From the grave and beyond, Cook swipes at Blair over war, I, 10.1.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2140259.ece

7.15pm

Blair criticises manner of Saddam execution

Tuesday January 9, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
Staff and agencies

The way in which Saddam Hussein was executed was "completely wrong", Tony Blair said tonight in his first public comment on the subject.

Speaking at a Downing Street press conference with Japan's prime minister, Shinzo Abe, Mr Blair also stressed that the manner of Saddam's execution should not "blind us to the crimes he committed against his own people".

The prime minister, who was on holiday in Florida at the time of Saddam's execution on December 30, has faced criticism for his subsequent silence. Mobile phone footage shot at the execution showed the former Iraqi dictator facing sectarian taunts before his death.

A week ago, when the mobile phone footage emerged, Mr Blair's deputy, John Prescott, condemned the events as "deplorable". At the time Downing Street said Mr Blair backed an inquiry into the circumstances of the execution called by Iraq's government but refused to specifically endorse Mr Prescott's comments.

After the chancellor, Gordon Brown, used a television interview at the weekend to echo Mr Prescott's line, Downing Street issued a new statement calling the circumstances of the execution "wrong and unacceptable".

Today, Mr Blair said his stance had remained consistent.

"As has been very obvious from the comments of other ministers and indeed from my own official spokesman, the manner of the execution of Saddam was completely wrong," he said.

"But that should not blind us to the crimes he committed against his own people, including the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, one million causalities in the Iran/Iraq war and the use of chemical weapons against his own people, wiping out entire villages.

"So the crimes that Saddam committed does not excuse the manner of his execution but the manner of his execution does not excuse the crimes.

"Now I think that is a perfectly sensible position that most people would reasonably accept."

Pressed again on the subject, Mr Blair said that the manner of Saddam's execution was "wrong and unacceptable".

He added: "But we should bear in mind and not allow that while saying it's wrong then to lurch into a position of forgetting the victims of Saddam, the people who he killed deliberately as an act of policy, hundreds of thousands of them in Iraq.

"So of course any sensible, moderate person makes those points about the scenes that we have seen, about the execution, but it should not be then translated into some sort of excuse for the crimes he committed against his own people."

    Blair criticises manner of Saddam execution, G, 9.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1986511,00.html


 

Why is my dad far away

in that place called Guantanamo Bay?

Young boy's plea to Tony Blair

Published: 09 January 2007
The Independent
By Ben Russell, Political Correspondent

Ten-year-old Anas el-Banna will walk to the door of Number 10 Downing Street this week to ask for an answer to the question he has been trying to have answered for four years: Why can't my Dad come home?

His father, Jamil, is one of eight British residents languishing among the almost 400 inmates at the American base at Guantanamo Bay, which opened five years ago to the day this Thursday - the day of Anas's protest.

Mr Banna, was taken to Guantanamo Bay four years ago after being seized in Gambia along with fellow detainee Bisher al-Rawi. He was accused of having a suspicious device in his luggage. It turned out to be a battery charger. No charges have been made.

He suffers from severe diabetes, but his lawyers say he has not been offered medication and has been denied the food he needs. His eyesight is now failing.

A year ago, his son wrote to Tony Blair for the second time to ask why the Government was not helping him return home. The then six-year-old did not even receive a reply. The second letter elicited a cursory note from the Foreign Office. It stated that because Mr Banna is not a British citizen, although his wife and children are, nothing could be done for him.

So on Thursday, carrying yet another letter, Anas and his mother Sabah will return with campaigners and MPs to demand the closure of the camp and action to free the British residents.

Their MP, the the Liberal Democrat frontbencher Sarah Teather, said the Banna children, who are of Jordanian origin but have grown up in North London, were devastated by their father's detention.

The Downing Street protest will come during a week of action to mark the fifth anniversary of Guantanamo Bay. Since its inception, the camp has drawn furious protests from across the globe. Last night, Ian McCartney, the Foreign Office minister, faced anger on the floor of the House of Commons as the MPs for Mr Banna and another detainee, Bisher al-Rawi, lambasted the Government.

Today Ms Teather will present a petition to Parliament demanding his release, while tomorrow, relatives and friends will hold a candlelit vigil outside Downing Street.

Hundreds of protesters dressed in the notorious orange boiler suits that are the uniform at Guantanamo, plan a separate protest outside the US Embassy.

Peace activist Cindy Sheehan is among a group of US activists that has travelled to Cuba to protest outside the camp, on the Cuban side. With them will be former inmate Asif Iqbal, one of the Tipton Three, who was released without charge in March 2004.

Many of the British residents have families who are British citizens, and had leave to remain in the UK, but the Government has refused to take responsibility for them. Yesterday, Ed Davey, chief of staff to the Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell, used the Commons debate to attack ministers for allowing British residents to "languish" in the camp.

He said: "The Government has been both hypocritical and morally bankrupt. They have condemned Guantanamo Bay but have failed to take action for the British residents." He said the US administration had offered to send the men home, but the UK had refused to accept them. He added: " The Prime Minister should stop talking about closing Guantanamo and start doing something about it."

Human rights lawyer Zachary Katznelson, senior advocate at the charity Reprieve, represents the eight men. He said several were held in solitary confinement, some in cells that were lit 24 hours a day. He added: "If they have committed any crime, of course they should be prosecuted and punished. But I have not seen evidence that they have. If it's there, let's see it."

The Foreign Office said it had agreed to make special representations on behalf of Bisher al-Rawi, but insisted that the courts had found that the Government had "no locus" to intervene of behalf of the other men.

On Thursday, Anas el-Banna will try, for the third time, to persuade them to change their minds.

British residents at Guantanamo

* JAMIL EL-BANNA, Jordanian. Held in Guantanamo since March 2003

Arrested, with Bisher al-Rawi, in the Gambia, where they had gone to set up a mobile peanut-processing plant. He was taken by the Americans to Afghanistan and then to Guantanamo Bay. He suffers from severe diabetes but his lawyers say he has not been offered medication.

* BINYAM MOHAMED, Ethiopian. Held in Guantanamo since September 2004

Came to UK in 1996 seeking asylum and was granted indefinite leave to remain. Travelled to Afghanistan in 2001 before fleeing to Pakistan. Charged in relation to an alleged dirty bomb plot at the Guantanamo Bay military tribunal. The tribunal was invalidated last year

* SHAKER AAMER, Saudi Arabian. Held in Guantanamo since February 2002

Was applying for British nationality after settling in Battersea, south London, with his wife and four children, all of whom are British citizens. Seized in Pakistan in 2002. Has been kept in isolation since September 2005 and has been on hunger strike.

* BISHER AL-RAWI, Iraqi. Held in Guantanamo since March 2003

Fled Iraq for Britain with his family 20 years ago. Arrested in the Gambia where he had travelled to help set up a peanut processing plant. Accused of taking a weapon of mass destruction.

* OMAR DEGHAYES, Libyan. Held in Guantanamo since August 2002

Became a British citizen after fleeing to the UK with his family. He appears on a "Chechnyan training video", which his lawyers insist is case of mistaken identity.

* AHMED ERRACHIDI, Moroccan. Held in Guantanamo since May 2002

Worked as a cook in London for 18 years. Seized in Pakistan and accused of attending a terrorist training camp in July 2001. His lawyers say he was working in London at the time. He is in isolation.

* AHMED BELBACHA, Algerian. Held in Guantanamo since March 2002

Lived in Bournemouth, where he worked in the hotel trade. The 37-year-old was refused refugee status in Britain, but granted indefinite leave to remain. Arrested in Pakistan after fleeing Afghanistan in 2001. Alleged to have attended a training camp, which he denies.

* ABDELNOUR SAMEUR, Algerian. Held in Guantanamo since June 2002

The 33-year-old decorator, who settled in north London, was granted refugee status in 2000. Went to Afghanistan in 2001 and was shot in Pakistan trying to reach the Algerian embassy. He was arrested in hospital. Alleged to have attended a training camp, which he denies

    Why is my dad far away in that place called Guantanamo Bay? Young boy's plea to Tony Blair, I, 9.1.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2137687.ece

Carry on flying, says Blair

- science will save the planet

· Personal sacrifices to cut emissions 'impractical'
· Green groups accuse PM of failing to set example

Tuesday January 9, 2007
Guardian
Nicholas Watt

Tony Blair today wades into the growing controversy over how individuals can help to tackle global warming by declaring that he has no intention of abandoning long-haul holiday flights to reduce his carbon footprint.

Days after his environment minister branded Ryanair the "irresponsible face of capitalism" for opposing an EU carbon emissions scheme, the prime minister says it is impractical to expect people to make personal sacrifices by taking holidays closer to home.

"I personally think these things are a bit impractical actually to expect people to do that," Mr Blair says in an interview.

The prime minister, who recently had a family holiday in Miami, adds that it would be wrong to impose "unrealistic targets" on travellers. "You know, I'm still waiting for the first politician who's actually running for office who's going to come out and say it - and they're not," Mr Blair says. "It's like telling people you shouldn't drive anywhere."

His remarks contrast with the tone set by Ian Pearson, the environment minister, who last week used strong language to criticise Ryanair for opposing the European commission's plan to include all flights within Europe in the EU carbon trading scheme from 2011.

Mr Blair's remarks are also at odds with the declaration last month by the Prince of Wales that he would cut back on domestic and international flights.

David Cameron, the Tory leader, believes he has stolen a march on the government by emphasising green issues and his own credentials - installing a wind turbine on his new house.

The prime minister says: "I think that what we need to do is to look at how you make air travel more energy efficient, how you develop the new fuels that will allow us to burn less energy and emit less. How - for example - in the new frames for the aircraft, they are far more energy efficient."

Downing Street was irritated last night that the interview, with Sky News, was quickly interpreted as a snub to attempts to reduce people's carbon footprints. "This is not about the prime minister's travel," a source said.

The prime minister's spokesman said that Mr Blair offset all his official travel, though No 10 refused to say whether he did this on personal flights. He added: "All government activity will be carbon neutral by 2015 and the prime minister has taken the lead in this."

Mr Blair says in his interview that he is taking a difficult decision on whether to replace Britain's nuclear energy capacity. In his Labour conference speech last year the prime minister mocked Mr Cameron for adopting a "multiple choice" approach by saying he would only endorse nuclear power as a last resort.

Mr Blair's message in the interview is that everyone needs to work together, but imposing strict rules would only backfire."Britain is 2% of the world's emissions. We shut down all of Britain's emissions tomorrow - the growth in China will make up the difference within two years.

"So we've got to be realistic about how much obligation we've got to put on ourselves. The danger, for example, if you say to people 'Right, in Britain ... you're not going to have any more cheap air travel,' everybody else is going to be having it. So you've got to do this together in a way that doesn't end up actually putting people off the green agenda by saying you must not have a good time any more and can't consume. All the evidence is that if you use the science and technology constructively, your economy can grow, people can have a good time, but do so more responsibly."

Emily Armistead, of Greenpeace, said: "Tony Blair is crossing his fingers and hoping someone will invent aeroplanes that don't cause climate change. But that's like holding out for cigarettes that don't cause cancer. Hoping for the best isn't a policy, it's a delusion."

Mike Childs, of Friends of the Earth, said: "It's disappointing that Tony Blair is refusing to set an example on tackling climate change, but it is even more disappointing that his government is failing to take decisive action to cut UK emissions."

    Carry on flying, says Blair - science will save the planet, G, 9.1.2007, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1985981,00.html

Martin Rowson        The Guardian        p. 27        8.1.2007

Blair still silent on Saddam

Published: 06 January 2007
The Independent
By Andrew Grice, Political Editor

Tony Blair has refused again to comment on the execution of Saddam Hussein, leaving himself out of step with members of his Cabinet.

On his first public appearance since returning from holiday in Miami, the Prime Minister said at a London hospital: "I've decided to talk about health today. I will talk about all those other issues next week but not today." Asked if he thought he should be talking about the execution, he said: "I'll find a way to talk about it, but not today. I want to concentrate on the NHS."

Mr Blair's refusal has angered MPs. He may not make his first public response until Prime Minister's Questions next Wednesday, 11 days after the Saddam's execution.

Blair still silent on Saddam, I, 6.1.2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2129997.ece