The Sketch: Time was called – and Blair breathed again

Simon Carr
Friday 22 January 2010 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Is the Committee going off the boil again? They must know what Jack Straw's like but they didn't get anywhere near making him sweat.

Some years ago a group of us were at lunch with Jack, and he was asked whether he'd known if the 45-minute weapons in the dossier were battlefield munitions or missiles. This is the same pertinent question the committee had asked Geoff Hoon earlier this week. Hoon said he'd been so interested in the new claim that he'd called in officials to explicate the difference for him. They were just big guns, he was told. So he not only knew, he was happy to say he'd known.

Jack Straw's answer at that lunch was so brilliant I didn't understand a word of it and neither did anyone else. It was a full minute of jibber-jabbering pither-pother. It's what he says when he doesn't want to say anything.

How would he survive the forensic questioning of the well-regarded Roderic Lyne?

With ease. With nonchalance, in fact, because the question wasn't even put to him.

It's an error, I can't help feeling. If the Minister of War knew the truth and the Foreign Secretary knew the truth – how could the Prime Minister not know it?

Why didn't they ask Jack? Maybe they don't think it's significant. But it's one of the very few areas that Tony Blair can be trapped in something close to a lie – something so deceitful it amounts to a lie.

Straw, an urbane and attractive performer with eyes just the right side of axe murderer, made a few remarks of clarity. For Britain to have pursued a policy of regime change, he said, would have been "improper and unlawful". Roderic Lyne asked with equal clarity: "Was that the Prime Minister's view as well?"

There followed the pither-pother that says he's not going to say, uninterrupted by Lyne. For goodness sake, Lyne must know what the ex-Foreign Secretary is like – he worked for him for years. Maybe that's the problem.

There was a slightly better effort on the claim that Chirac would veto the crucial second resolution "in any circumstances". Lyne just managed to get a cross examination in during the hearing's last moments.

Chirac's remarks hadn't been official French government policy, Lyne pointed out, they'd been made in a television interview. "Did you seek clarification later?" Lyne asked, "Or did you say 'game over'?"

Jack's answer did seem to contain the admission that the British Government was relying on his own translation of Chirac's French. Lyne overtly disputed the translation. And there was indeed a "clarification" issued later by the French... but suddenly the committee had run out of time.

And once again, Tony Blair breathed more easily.

simoncarr@sketch.sc

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in