Blair rejects calls to publish war advice

[cal04]

Tony Blair today angrily rejected repeated calls for the government's legal advice on the Iraq war to be published in full, after a member of Lord Butler's inquiry broke ranks to demand the document be aired. Michael Mates, the Tory member of the inquiry which looked into intelligence failures before the war, said it was now "incumbent" on Mr Blair to make public the legal advice from the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith.

But, at his monthly press conference in Downing Street this morning, a seemingly testy Mr Blair dismissed suggestions he should reveal the documents and also rejected the argument that the government had now set a precedent by releasing Lord Falconer's legal advice on the status of the Prince of Wales's wedding.

He told reporters: "Firstly, we haven't broken the precedent, and, secondly, Peter Goldsmith has made his statement and I have got absolutely nothing to add to it. "He has been over these questions literally scores of times and the position has not changed." Asked whether a March 17 parliamentary statement presented by ministers as Lord Goldsmith's legal "opinion" truly reflected the attorney general's views, Mr Blair responded: "That's what he said and that's what I say. He has dealt with this time and time and time again."

When a journalist attempted to pursue the line of questioning, Mr Blair snapped: "I've answered your question, that's enough." Mr Mates told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning: " is not an absolute rule. We discovered that there were two or three occasions in the past when law officers' advice to the government has been published. "If no wrong was done over this bit of advice (the Iraq advice) either ... then I believe it is incumbent upon the government to again make an exception and publish that advice."


http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1425381,00.html?gusrc=ticker-103704

[Spazito]

1. Damn, looks like Blair needs a 'Jimmy/Jeff' of his own!

How dare reporters actually ask hard question! I love the fact that blair is getting testy, he should, he lied and is being called on it.

[LynnTheDem]

2. Gee...if the legal advice said the invasion & occupation of a sovereign

nation that wasn't doing anything against anyone was LEGAL, why would bLiar refuse to publish it???


That seems strange. Me, I'd publish it far & wide just to cover my own arse.

There's only one reason I can think of as to why bLiar refuses to publish the legal advice as to whether the invasion & occupation of a sovereign nation that wasn't doing anything against anyone was legal or not...