[A-List] UK state: Iraq crisis

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Yes, the Westland affair, where Kinnock had a chance to bury Thatcher once
and for all and instead let her off the hook. Apparently IDS is being
compared to the hapless Neil after yesterday's poor performance. In fact
there is little chance that he could have done much damage anyway, given the
diminished status of Parliament and the overwhelming, loyal Labour majority.
However, it underlines that Tony's fall will be an internal party matter in
the style once patented by the Conservatives. Meanwhile the Guardian gets a
chance to remind us, yet again, that there is no serious political
alternative to New Labour, given the ramshackle status of HM Opposition.

-----

Faltering Commons performance 'like Kinnock at his worst'

Nicholas Watt, political correspondent
Thursday June 5, 2003
The Guardian

Iain Duncan Smith found himself under criticism from Tory MPs last night
after a faltering performance in the Commons which was being compared to
Neil Kinnock's worst moments.

Well-placed Tories said Mr Duncan Smith had allowed himself to be browbeaten
by Tony Blair on a day when the prime minister should have been on the
defensive.

Mr Duncan Smith's performance was likened by some colleagues to that of Mr
Kinnock, then Labour leader, against Margaret Thatcher over the 1986
Westland affair.

Mr Duncan Smith, whose Commons performances have improved in recent months,
thought he was on strong ground in the house yesterday when he seized on the
allegation by John Reid that "rogue" spies had briefed against Downing
Street.

The Tory leader asked Mr Blair whether he endorsed the remarks made by Dr
Reid, adding: "We have the unedifying sight of the leader of the house being
sent out to do your bidding and attack elements of the security services,
which is disgraceful. Will you now either publish that dossier or hold an
independent inquiry so the public can judge for themselves?"

Mr Blair sidestepped Mr Duncan Smith's question and refused to endorse Dr
Reid's claim. But the Tory leader repeatedly asked the prime minister about
Dr Reid's allegation, as he devoted all his six allotted questions to the
row over the alleged misuse of intelligence briefings.

Tory critics said Mr Duncan Smith had been wrong to use all his questions on
the same subject, which allowed Labour MPs to shout him down as he
repeatedly returned to the theme.

Mr Duncan Smith is understood to have been advised by senior Tories before
his Commons appearance yesterday that he should be careful about questioning
the prime minister's integrity over Iraq. One Tory said: "Do we really
believe that the prime minister lied? I certainly do not. Downing Street may
have got a little carried away with the dossier, but all the signs are that
intelligence officials have no problems with the government and in fact
rather admire Tony Blair."

Tory sources insisted that Mr Duncan Smith was on strong ground. They
decided earlier this week to break the bipartisan approach to Iraq because
Downing Street's alleged misuse of intelligence raised wider questions about
its reliance on spin. This was seen as a gamble because changing tack would
leave the Tories vulnerable to the charge that they were making
opportunistic use of unsubstantiated media allegations.

Mr Blair rammed this point home when he said: "You had intelligence
briefings as well. I suspect the problem for you is that you have been
wondering over the past few days whether to jump on this particular
bandwagon or not - and you have made the wrong choice."

------

Curious saga of cabinet bruiser and the R-word

Controversy grows amid attempts to unravel truth of minister's 'rogue'
elements claim

Nicholas Watt and Michael White
Thursday June 5, 2003
The Guardian

Government sources were backpedalling last night over a series of comments
from John Reid, the leader of the Commons, that "rogue" elements within the
intelligence services were actively undermining Downing Street.

Dr Reid launched his attacks on uncorroborated briefings from within the
intelligence services in a string of interviews on Tuesday night and
yesterday morning. One government source said last night that Dr Reid, who
relishes his reputation as the most silver-tongued member of the cabinet,
had "embellished" the agreed line.

Tony Blair and the Downing Street press office pointedly did not use the key
word, "rogue". By teatime yesterday Dr Reid was claiming that the Times, the
media outlet through which he first unleashed his invective - had introduced
the word "rogue" into a conversation and he had repeated it.

This explanation appeared implausible because government sources were using
the R-word as early as Monday afternoon. The Guardian was told that Downing
Street would emerge unscathed from any inquiry because a "rogue spook" had
been identified as the source of the original BBC story which sparked the
row.

Indeed, the decision to wheel out Dr Reid - a famous bruiser within
Westminster circles - was made at a meeting of government strategists on
Monday.

Fearing that Downing Street had lost control of the agenda while the prime
minister was abroad, Dr Reid would attempt to put the row over whether
Downing Street had misused intelligence into perspective by blaming "rogue
elements" in the security services for attempting to undermine the
government.

"There have been uncorroborated briefings by a potentially rogue element -
or indeed rogue elements - in the intelligence services," Dr Reid told the
Times.

Then, as his explosive remarks revived memories of the paranoia of the
Wilson years yesterday morning, he struck again on the Today programme.
Warming to his theme, the pugilistic Dr Reid embarked on a point-by-point
dissection of the BBC's claims that Downing Street had "sexed up" last
September's weapons dossier.

His outburst appeared to leave the veteran Today presenter John Humphrys
speechless at times. Opinions were divided over the encounter: some saw it
as an unsophisticated display of verbal bullying, others as a classic
example of a minister countering media froth.

The government's wobble over Dr Reid's remarks showed the dangers in the
high-risk strategy of using such explosive language. "John does have a habit
of embellishing things," one source said. "There is also a danger that
attacking a couple of spooks will be seen as an attack on the security
services as a whole."

As the government saw off a rebellion in the Commons last night, sources
said they were confident that Dr Reid's mission was, on balance, successful.
"It was really important to put this row into perspective. Yes it is a risk
to hit out at rogue spies, but we wanted people to examine the evidence in
front of them. Do they believe a spy with a grudge or do they believe the
prime minister and the heads of the security services?"

Business managers and strategists only summoned Dr Reid after they were sure
of their ground. Within hours of his return to Britain from the G8 summit,
the prime minister spoke to intelligence chiefs to ensure that the anonymous
sources briefing against the government were "freelancing" and were not
acting on orders.

The response of the intelligence chiefs convinced Downing Street that the
unnamed security source who briefed the BBC last week was acting alone. By
lunchtime on Monday a "line" was agreed which was fed to government whips,
ministers and loyal backbenchers. Downing Street was in no danger, they were
briefed to tell journalists, because a "rogue" spy was responsible.

As they reflected on the row, in a relatively relaxed mood after a mere 11
Labour MPs rebelled last night, government business managers blamed the
furore on the Whitsun recess and the prime minister's overseas trip. Hilary
Armstrong, the usually tranquil chief whip, was incensed by days of hostile
media coverage which worsened every day despite Mr Blair's increasingly
categorical denials - a virtual Groundhog Day routine during his foreign
trip.

One well-placed source said: "When the Commons is not sitting, the usual
suspects, who loathe everything the government does, secure a lot of airtime
and appear to be influential players. As soon as they returned to
Westminster on Monday it quickly became clear that the silent majority of
Labour MPs did not share their views."

-----

BBC defence correspondent is thorn in flesh of Downing Street

Patrick Wintour
Thursday June 5, 2003
The Guardian

Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's defence correspondent, and Alastair Campbell, the
prime minister's director of communications, have a longstanding mutual
loathing that has helped fuel the row between Downing Street and the BBC
over claims that ministers wanted to harden the security services dossier
last September.

Relations plummeted in November 2000 when Gilligan was subjected to Downing
Street ridicule and dubbed Gullible Gilligan for highlighting a draft EU
constitution on the BBC Today programme.

Downing Street claimed the document had been published by the European
commission five months earlier, and had been reported widely by the serious
press at the time.

Mr Campbell, reviving the row in the Guardian letters page a fortnight ago,
said: "It was only when the Eurosceptic press discovered the document and
began to misinterpret its contents, that Gilligan noticed it too, and the
Today programme allowed the Eurosceptics to set its agenda".

Gilligan, unusually willing for a BBC correspondent to give his personal
opinions on air and in the media, hit back saying that "connoisseurs of the
Downing Street press operation may not be shocked to learn" that its
criticisms of his piece turned out not to be true.

He went on: "The constitution joined that long list of EU projects denied by
the government as preposterous until almost the eve of their incorporation
into British law.

"Now that day has arrived, however, there seems no reason for Mr Campbell to
maintain the fiction."

Gilligan also drew fire when he said Iraqis had lived in greater fear after
the fall of Baghdad than during Saddam's rule. He accused the British and
American governments of making many untrustworthy, premature or downright
false claims - such as the "uprising" in Basra, the "fall" of Umm Qasr, the
"discovery" of a chemical weapons plant, and the "execution" of British
soldiers.

In a piece in the Mail on Sunday last weekend discussing his revelation of
Downing Street pressure to harden the September dossier, Gilligan said he
had been told by his intelligence source that only one word was needed to
explain the late changes made to the September dossier - Campbell.

His source alleged "It was transformed the week before publication, to make
it sexier."