Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Ronnie Cowan Excerpts
Thursday 16th March 2017

(7 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Bernard Jenkin Portrait Mr Jenkin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful for the right hon. Lady’s kind remarks, and it is important that we make such Select Committee statements because they engage more Members in our reports. I regard our report as a serious piece of work that makes serious recommendations, and hon. and right hon. Members of all views on the original conflict can embrace it as a better way of making such decisions in government and a better way of conducting public inquiries.

Ronnie Cowan Portrait Ronnie Cowan (Inverclyde) (SNP)
- Hansard - -

As a member of the Select Committee, I point out that the Chilcot inquiry was about identifying mistakes that led to loss of life, military and civilian. With that in mind, it is unacceptable that the inquiry took seven years to reach a conclusion. Those mistakes could have been repeated in that timescale. However, the Committee points out:

“The Iraq Inquiry reported that the Blair Government did not expose key policy decisions to rigorous review.”

Backing that up, paragraph 63 says:

“Cabinet was…being asked to confirm the decision that the diplomatic process was at an end and that the House of Commons should be asked to endorse the use of military action to enforce Iraq’s compliance. Given the gravity of this decision, Cabinet should have been made aware of the legal uncertainties.”

I put it to the Chairman that the evidence provided to the Cabinet appears to have been designed to produce the result that the then Prime Minister was looking for.

Bernard Jenkin Portrait Mr Jenkin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think that is an accurate comment, and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his contribution to the Committee and this report. It cuts both ways, because the Cabinet went along with being sidelined. Chilcot was clear that plenty of Cabinet Ministers were quite content to leave it to others to make the decisions when they had the right to insist on being consulted. Our report addresses how the legal advice was taken, explored and discussed by the Cabinet, and we make recommendations about that. Our proposals make clear what Cabinet Ministers are entitled to expect. It is not a favour to ask that of the Prime Minister; it is part of the proper procedure of Cabinet government. We do not have a superannuated presidency in this country. We have a constitutional Cabinet Government, which should be reinforced by these proposals.