Reg Keys' response to leaking of Attorney General's Advice
I welcome the fact that the original Advice is now out in the open. There is nothing in it that I didn't expect. The six points reflect the anxieties I felt at the time the Prime Minister took this country into Iraq, anxieties which, it turns out, were totally justified.
I believe the progress to war was pushed through because the US and UK did not want the UN weapons inspectors to complete their work; it would not suit the war agenda if the inspectors found no WMDs.
The Advice shows that there is an extremely large gap between the Attorney's position on 7 March when the Advice was written and his position on 17 March when the 'summary' - apparently coming to the opposite conclusions - was presented to the Cabinet.
What happened during this time? How were the contradictions bridged?
Such a rapid about-face, from illegal to legal with no change in the facts, demands an explanation, and the families of the 85 British servicemen who died need an explanation. We have a right to know if our sons died legally or illegally - we have a right to see the later Advice if there was one.
24 April 2005