Previous page | Contents | Next page
4.2  |  Iraq WMD assessments, July to September 2002
390.  Mr Scarlett stated that he remembered Mr Bassett being at the meeting with
Mr Campbell, but he did not remember what Mr Bassett had said and he did not
remember taking any notice of it.190 Mr Scarlett added:
“… the general advice that I took away from Alastair Campbell, from nobody else …
was that the … draft … needed, ideally, to have more detail in it, needed to be less
assertive, less rhetorical … And indeed the 16th September draft was clearly striking
a slightly different tone in its language.”
391.  Asked about the views expressed in the emails and their impact, Mr Campbell told
the Inquiry:
“That may have been their honestly held opinions, but I didn’t agree with them.
I actually thought that the paper that John Scarlett produced on September 10 was
… a very, very good piece of work. So, as I said at the Hutton inquiry, they are all
perfectly entitled to make those points, if that’s their opinion, but, ultimately, it would
not be their decision …”191
392.  Mr Blair told the Hutton Inquiry that he was aware of the process for
producing the dossier, and his view was that it was “important that it made
the best case we could make subject, obviously, to it being owned by the Joint
Intelligence Committee”.
393.  There is no evidence that Mr Blair saw the emails on the issue between
officials in No.10.
394.  Asked, in the light of the comment that No.10 had wanted the dossier “to be as
strong as possible within the bounds of available intelligence”, whether he was aware
that process (the email exchange) was going on, Mr Blair told the Hutton Inquiry that he
had been aware of that, and “it was important that it [the dossier] made the best case we
could make subject, obviously, to it being owned by the Joint Intelligence Committee”.192
395.  Mr Blair added that, as Parliament was being recalled and he would be presenting
the dossier, he had been concerned to make sure the dossier made the “best case”:
“Provided that is clearly understood as meaning that it is only if the intelligence
agencies thought both that the actual intelligence should be included and that there
was not improper weight being given to any aspect of that intelligence.”193
190  The Hutton Inquiry, public hearing, 23 September 2003, page 151.
191  Public hearing, 12 January 2010, page 83.
192  The Hutton Inquiry, public hearing, 28 August 2003, page 6.
193  The Hutton Inquiry, public hearing, 28 August 2003, page 7.
187
Previous page | Contents | Next page