What's Up With the Hutton Inquiry?

by Mary

At the start of the inquiry, Lord Hutton said that he wanted to release his report by the end of the year, but according to the latest news reports it will be released sometime next month. Nevertheless, the ripples from the inquiry continue to spread and new revelations have created more problems for the Blair government. The latest revelation comes from Scott Ritter who said that in the late 1990s he was working with MI6 to plant stories in the foreign press to create a case for using military force on Iraq. This week, the British government admitted that it did run a program called Operation Mass Appeal as reported by Ritter, but denies any wrong doing. Ritter reported that MI6 continued to plant stories up to the start of the war and said that Dr. David Kelly was also part of this disinformation campaign. Poland was one of the three targeted countries (the other two were India and South America) and it appears the effort to shape public opinion was quite successful as the citizens of Poland were some of the few in Europe that supported the war.

This latest revelation provides yet one more solid indication that the drive to conduct a war on Iraq was unconnected to 9/11 as the British media campaign to sell sanctions and the use of military force clearly pre-date the al Qaeda attack on the United States. One question to ask is: was the Blair government a silent backer of the PNAC? Certainly, the Blair government worked to subvert the evidence this year and last in order to make that case. Although the outward picture was that the Blair government was a reluctant partner in this war and, as you might remember from this time last year, many people believed Blair was acting to restrain Bush's rush to war by urging him to leave it in the hands of the UN inspectors, the reality is that the British government was just as anxious to use force and they actually created doctored evidence that made it all but inevitable. The blood on the hands of Bush and the PNAC also covers the hands of the Blair and his government. So much for all these honorable men.

Hutton's inquiry is causing worries for the BBC as well. One of the possible outcomes of the report could be the resignation of senior BBC executives. The BBC is waiting to hear how the report covers the mistakes made by the BBC especially after they stood behind Andrew Gilligan's accusation that the Blair government "sexed up" the September 2002 dossier and once it became evident during the inquiry that he had exaggerated the truth himself. Gilligan's report led to the inquisition of Dr. Kelly and his subsequent death and thus, was responsible for setting off the Hutton Inquiry. (It is quite an irony that both Gilligan and the Blair government exaggerated facts about the claim that Saddam could launch an attack on Britain within 45 minutes. Yet although Gilligan got the details of his story wrong - but not the general substance, the Blair government was clearly more cynical and more despicable in how and why they used that claim.)

The Hutton inquiry was an amazingly open inquiry with almost all evidence posted to the official website as soon as it was given in court. However, it appears that the British government is having misgivings about the openness shown and had the Cabinet Office rewrite their report to remove any reference that the Hutton inquiry should be used as a model of openness in government.

The report initially highlighted the importance of Lord Hutton's unprecedented release of confidential documents during his inquiry into the death of David Kelly. But it was redrafted before publication to remove positive references to Hutton as an example of good practice.

The excising comes as Whitehall is convulsed in a dispute about whether to use Lord Hutton's findings to announce a dramatic extension of open government or bring down the shutters again on the release of information.

The censored report is entitled Freedom of Information and includes a foreword from Lord Falconer, the secretary of state for constitutional affairs, saying his aim is to build trust and "make the process of government more transparent and accountable at every level".

The report highlights the progress the government has made in implementing open government over the past year as part of its commitment to freedom of information.

So it seems that our government is not the only one that revises reports with which the administration disagrees.