Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
242.  In questions to Mr Cook later that day, Mr Dalyell asked for confirmation that the
House of Commons would be consulted before a commitment to military action, not
after.87 Mr Cook responded that Mr Blair had said no decision had been taken, and no
one anticipated one being taken in the near or medium future. Mr Cook added:
“Indeed, there is no timetable or process by which such a decision could be taken.
It would therefore be ludicrously premature … to commit myself to what the House
may do in the event of a hypothetical outcome that is not expected for many
months.”
243.  Mr Douglas Hogg (Conservative) asked for an early debate on Iraq, the publication
of a document setting out “the chief areas of concern in the context of Iraq”, and that,
in the event of military action outside action in the No-Fly Zones, the House should be
given an opportunity to vote on a substantive motion.88
244.  Mr Cook replied that a decision might never be taken. He added that the areas
of concern:
“… were well known and unarguable. The fact is that the Iraqi regime has several
thousand of unaccounted litres of toxic chemicals that would be appropriate to
use in a chemical weapon; it has made a considerable investment in developing
biological germ agents that could be used in biological weapons; and has proceeded
intensively – and appears to be continuing to do so – with medium-range missiles
that could deliver such warheads. In addition … Saddam Hussein used chemical
weapons …
“Given that history and the present record, it is entirely proper that the world should
take action through every available channel, starting with the United Nations to
ensure Saddam Hussein accepts what the rest of the world accepts: no regime
should have access to weapons of mass destruction unless it fully participates in
international regimes to control proliferation.”
245.  The following day, an article in The Guardian newspaper reported that, questioned
by reporters at his weekly meeting, Mr Cook had:
“… admitted that ‘many people sometimes have contradictory instincts on this.
Nobody likes military action.’
“… also praised the Labour rebels as MPs who include some with ‘long and
honourable records in opposing proliferation and demanding strong action’ against
transgressors. That may have been a hint to colleagues that they should not be
87  House of Commons, Official Report, 7 March 2002, column 423.
88  House of Commons, Official Report, 7 March 2002, column 424.
430
Previous page | Contents | Next page