Can we trust any British politician?
7 March 2005
The Hon Nicholas Soames MP
House of Commons
LONDON
SW1A 0AA
Dear Nicholas Soames
There is a code of honour which was long practised by British politicians. It simply required that if a politician was found to have made misleading statements to fellow politicians in the House of Commons he would resign.
I would like to know why this practice has been abandoned and whether you and the Conservative Party would be willing to press for a return to proper standards of integrity in British politics. I am referring to the case of Tony Blair whose misstatements are known to everyone. There is a 30 page dossier on the subject which can be seen at www.impeachblair.org and gives many striking examples.
In general terms Tony Blair vehemently presented a case that a poor, defenceless and half starving nation, crippled by sanctions, was a major threat to its region and the world. Not one intelligence report in his possession suggested this. The huge discrepancy between what we were told and the facts on the ground is something which angers every thinking person in this country.
Here are some specific misleading statements contrasted with information that was in the possession of Tony Blair when he made them.
1. On 24 September 2002 he told the House of Commons, “I am aware, of course, that people are going to have to take elements of this on the good faith of our intelligence services. This is what they are telling me . . . the intelligence picture . . . is extensive, detailed and authoritative.”
The joint Intelligence Committee report of 15 March 2002 stated, “intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes is sporadic and patchy.”
2. On 18 March 2003 Tony Blair told the House of Commons of vast stocks of nerve agent and chemical munitions. Then he said, “we are now seriously asked to accept that in the last few years, contrary to all history, contrary to all intelligence, he decided unilaterally to destroy the weapons. Such a claim is palpably absurd.”
It is elementary scientific knowledge that most chemical and nerve agents deteriorate rapidly. Their survival for over five years was not likely even if they had been retained. His expert advisors would not be likely to have kept this fact from him. The UNSCOM report of 19 January 1999 stated that UNSCOM, “confirmed that [growth] media was burned and buried there [at Al-Hakam, the former production facility, in 1991] but the types and quantities are not known.” It was therefore recorded that the entire stocks were “unaccounted for”. The report of Hans Blix to the UN Security Council on 14 February 2003 stated, “Many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for. . . One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist.” Joint Intelligence Committee assessments over several years made it clear that the quantity of material unaccounted for in December 1998 was not to be taken as indicating existing stockpiles. Also, “From evidence available to us, we believe Iraq . . . may have hidden small quantities of agents and weapons.” (JIC assessment 15 March 2002.)
3. On 18 March 2003 Tony Blair moved a resolution on the House of Commons in support of a war against Iraq. “This house . . . recognises that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles and its continuing non-compliance with Security Council resolutions pose a threat to international peace and security.”
The intelligence reports of 2002, 2003 made no reference to any intention by Iraq to use nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons outside its borders. The only possibility of the use of such weapons anywhere by Iraq was considered to be the use of battlefield weapons in Iraq if Iraq were invaded.
Tony Blair makes many other claims which are at striking variance with the facts known to him at the time and which are detailed in the dossier referred to above.
Trust for British politicians is acknowledged to be low. The silence of the House of Commons on this matter is certainly a factor. I cannot understand why virtually all British MPs and all the main parties are silent on this fundamental issue of integrity in public life. Will you and the Conservative Party be willing to do something about it?
Yours sincerely
David Roberts