Chilcot Inquiry and Parliamentary Accountability Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Chilcot Inquiry and Parliamentary Accountability

Roger Mullin Excerpts
Wednesday 30th November 2016

(8 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Roger Mullin Portrait Roger Mullin (Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
- Hansard - -

One of the most ridiculous arguments put forward here today by a number of hon. Members is that the Scottish National party has no right to have a debate on Chilcot and that we should choose subjects that are of concern to Scotland. I say to them: tell that to the Scottish families whose sons died in that war. Tell it to the Scottish families whose sons were injured and who will have to live with their scars, both physical and mental, for the rest of their lives. Tell it to those people—

Graham P Jones Portrait Graham Jones
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Roger Mullin Portrait Roger Mullin
- Hansard - -

I will not give way, for the very good reason that I tried often to intervene on—

--- Later in debate ---
Baroness Laing of Elderslie Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Mrs Eleanor Laing)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (Roger Mullin) is not giving way.

Roger Mullin Portrait Roger Mullin
- Hansard - -

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I want to compliment one speech that I heard today, and it is that of the hon. Member for North Thanet (Sir Roger Gale). In his usual understated way, he made some of the most telling observations about why we should still care about what happened and about the need to learn the lessons. I cannot see how it can be argued that we can learn the lessons if we are unwilling critically to review the results of the Chilcot process.

I was critical when my constituency predecessor in Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath set up the inquiry—as I am critical now—that it was not a judge-led inquiry. I have also been critical in the House about Sir John Chilcot’s decision to invoke the Maxwellisation process, because he was not required to do so. That process allowed those who were criticised in the report to be the only ones to be given notice of what was being said about them and the only ones allowed to introduce new evidence into the process. For those reasons alone, this House needs to review and make its own judgment about the evidence. For me and many hon. Members from whom I have heard today, it is most telling that people recognise that the most important thing about the Chilcot report is not his personal views or interpretation, but the evidence that was presented, which this House is required to review.

I for one have confidence in the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, particularly in its Chairman, the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Mr Jenkin), whom we are asking to take this forward. If there is any reason at all for why we need further consideration by the Committee, it was given by the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) when reporting some of his conversations with Sir John Chilcot in the Liaison Committee. He asked a question about Mr Blair and if I quote him correctly, Sir John’s response was:

“You would have to ask him.”

How does this House ask him without asking him?