This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/06/chilcot-report-delay-iraq-war-lord-hurd-former-foreign-secretary

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Delay in publishing Chilcot report is ‘becoming a scandal’, says Lord Hurd Publication of Chilcot report delayed over criticisms of Blair government
(about 2 hours later)
Former foreign secretary Lord Hurd of Westwell has hit out at delays in publishing the official report into the Iraq war, warning it was becoming a scandal. The long-awaited Chilcot report on the 2003 invasion of Iraq is being held up by rows over criticisms of leading figures in the Blair government and will almost certainly not be published until after the general election, the Guardian has learned.
The Tory peer said publication of the long-delayed Chilcot inquiry report had “dragged on” beyond “forgivable delay” and urged ministers to ensure people were given the truth. That scenario emerged on Tuesday after former Conservative foreign secretary Lord Hurd described the way the inquiry had dragged on went beyond questions of mere negligence and forgiveable delay. “It is becoming a scandal”, he told peers. He added: “This is not something of trivial importance. It is something of which a large number of people in this country look anxiously for truth.”
But Cabinet Office spokesman Lord Wallace of Saltaire said the inquiry was independent of government and it was up to Sir John Chilcot to decide when to submit the report to the prime minister. Tony Blair has denied that he is to blame for the delays in the publication of the Chilcot report. However, along with Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, MI6, and government law officers, the former Labour prime minister almost certainly faces criticism in draft passages of the report he has been shown. Under the so-called “Maxwellisation” process, they are entitled to respond to any proposed criticism of their conduct.
“I continue to hope that its conclusions will shortly be available for all to see,” he told peers at question time, amid growing concern about whether the report will be published before the election. Liberal Democrat peer Lord Dykes described the continuing delay on Tuesday as an “utter and total disgrace”. He added: “More and more people think it is some kind of attempt to prolong the agony for Mr Blair facing possible war crimes charges.”
Wallace indicated that if it was not published before the end of February, it could be held back until after the general election to allow full debate on its findings. Cabinet Office minister Lord Wallace said the inquiry was completely independent of government and it was up to Sir John Chilcot to decide when to submit the report to David Cameron.
To cheers of support, Liberal Democrat Lord Dykes branded the continuing delay an “utter and total disgrace”. Wallace said the government had decided it would be “inappropriate” to publish the report before the election, if it was submitted after the end of February, because of the commitment to allow time for “substantial consultation and debate”. The government has “committed that if this is not available for publication by the end of February, it will be held back until after the election,” Wallace said.
He said: “More and more people think it is some kind of attempt to prolong the agony for Mr Blair facing possible war crimes charges.” It is widely assumed in government circles that Chilcot will not be in a position to submit his report by that end of February deadline.
Wallace told him: “We all regret the delay. But this is not unusual for inquiries of this sort.” Wallace confirmed that after years of heated disputes with successive cabinet secretaries, and discussions with Washington, Chilcot had agreed to a settlement whereby summaries, and “the gist”, of more than a hundred records of conversations between Blair and George Bush in the runup to the invasion, and of records of 200 cabinet discussions, would be published, but not the documents themselves.
Detailing other long-running inquiries, he said the Chilcot probe looked at nine years of British policy and operations in Iraq, so it was not entirely unexpected that it had taken such a long time. Wallace told peers: “We all regret the delay. But this is not unusual for inquiries of this sort.”
Hurd said: “This has dragged on beyond questions of mere negligence and forgivable delay. It is becoming a scandal. Referring to other long-running inquiries, he said the Chilcot probe looked at nine years of British policy and operations in Iraq, so it was not entirely unexpected that it had taken such a long time.
“This is not something of trivial importance. It is something of which a large number of people in this country look anxiously for truth. He said Cameron had not intervened at any point over publication.
“And isn’t it time the government exerted itself to make sure their reasonable demand is met?”
Wallace said: “We all regret the amount of time it has taken. It is, however, an independent inquiry.
“The government will receive the report. The one decision the government will then take is when the report can be published.”