Lib Dems shun WMD intelligence inquiry

[muriel_volestrangler]

The Liberal Democrat spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said his party was unwilling to take part in the inquiry because the remit fixed by Mr Straw was too narrow and excluded consideration of the use the Government made of intelligence.

Sir Menzies said that the reception of last week's Hutton report showed that "an inquiry which excluded politicians from scrutiny is unlikely to command public confidence".
...
The Foreign Secretary said the committee would be made up of Lord Butler, Sir John Chilcot, Field Marshal Lord Inge, chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee Labour's Ann Taylor and Tory MP Michael Mates.
...
Mr Ancram said the inquiry should consider the use Government made of intelligence material to determine whether ministers had "cherry-picked" information which supported the case for war.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=487353

If Mates is to be trusted, this could actually work out well - one Opposition MP inside the inquiry to make sure they consider the use of the intelligence material, and the Lib Dems outside it to denounce the government without having to take part in the committee's "consensus". But I seem to remember Mates is a pretty untrustworthy character.

[Briar]

1. Don't expect too much from Mates...

...like everyone else on that committee from the chairman (he's worth checking out) down he's an establishment type. Preserving the illusion that HMG is still wearing clothes is going to be more important than dragging out the truth.

The Lib Dems are right: "an inquiry which excluded politicians from scrutiny is unlikely to command public confidence".

That's the lesson of Hutton, the lesson Bliar and his loyalists refuse to admit, since their chief reason for excluding the part played by politicians is that Hutton has cleared Bliar of the charge of manipulating the evidence.

Further evidence of the BBC's collapse came just now on BBC New 24 when a supposedly unbiased "expert" summoned to pass judgment remarked that the exclusion of the Lib Dems didn't matter, since they had never been in government and should not be taken seriously.

Like the people of Britain, then.

[democract]

2. Everybody will (is?) handpicked

The report is probably being written as we speak.

[papau]

3. All US traffic and intel is beyond the scope-as is the political decisions

made based on that intel-

Now I'm not saying that this is a con -

but it seems like a con!

:-)

[T_i_B]

4. Analysis: Lib Dems snub inquiry

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3455309.stm

By refusing to take part, he undoubtedly believes it allows him to remain outside, throwing rocks at the government throughout.

And he clearly believes that, by agreeing to sit on the committee, the Tories are limiting their room for manoeuvre and are, in effect, condemning themselves to be party to a flawed inquiry and its subsequent conclusions.

Some in his own party are said to disagree with his position, believing it would have been better to be on the committee while reserving the right to criticise or pull out at a later stage.

But this was a calculated decision aimed at leaving the Liberal Democrats as the leaders of the war critics and free to criticise whenever they feel fit.

[non sociopath skin]

5. This is pretty consistent ...

.. with the Lib Dems stance on the war. Against till it started then in favour when it began.

They are past masters at being all things to all men.

The Skin