Previous page | Contents | Next page
13.1  |  Resources
There are risks that our taking on military leadership will result in our being
sucked into wider responsibilities for reconstruction with even higher costs.”
173.  Mr Dodds told the Inquiry why he had written that paper:
“… I think we had a specific request … from the Chancellor’s Office for a piece of
advice on the aftermath and I think what had happened was that it had become
clear, quite suddenly really, to the Chancellor … to the Treasury, that there was
a set of options being considered for the role that the UK [military] might play …
in Phase IV …”113
174.  Mr Dodds told the Inquiry that the Treasury’s earlier work had focused on the major
conflict phase of operations, using a three‑year planning framework. However:
“… it suddenly became clear to us … if we had been wiser, we might have kind of
anticipated this, but it was a bit of a surprise … that there were discussions going on
between parts of the UK Government and others around the role that the UK might
play, which had the potential to see us in Iraq for significantly longer than we had
been initially supposing.
“… the Treasury wasn’t in the loop before early … March, around this thinking, and
…. when this thinking emerged, there … appeared to have been an assumption
on behalf of some other parts of government that this was another thing where …
the Treasury would just sign the cheques … without being involved in the strategic
decision.”
175.  Mr Brown also received a paper from a Treasury official on the potential impact
of all military and non‑military expenditure in Iraq on public expenditure.114 The best
estimate of the cost of UK military combat operations was £3.1bn. Maintaining a
“medium‑term stabilisation/peace‑keeping force” might cost up to £1bn a year for
two years. The official advised that:
“… whilst the costs of the actual fighting are now pretty inescapable we still
have a window of opportunity to exert some influence over the scale of this
post‑conflict commitment.
176.  The 6 March meeting is described in detail later in this Section.
177.  The 14 March meeting of the Ad Hoc Group on Iraq (AHGI)115 was advised that the
IPU was considering how best to approach other donors for support on reconstruction,
113 Public hearing, 14 July 2010, pages 13‑16.
114 Minute Treasury [junior official] to Chancellor, 4 March 2003, ‘Iraq ‑ Potential Public Spending Impact’.
115 From 20 September 2002, the Ad Hoc Group on Iraq (AHGI) co‑ordinated all non‑military
cross‑government work on post‑conflict issues.
471
Previous page | Contents | Next page