Straw: Called to Commons

Jack Straw has defended the legality of the government's decision to go to war with Iraq.

The foreign secretary was called to the Commons to make a statement following the latest revelations about Lord Goldsmith's controversial legal advice.

Renewed speculation followed the release, under the Freedom of Information Act, of the resignation letter of the Foreign Office's deputy legal adviser.

Elizabeth Wilmshurst, in her letter of March 18, 2003, wrote of a possible war that "an unlawful use of force on such a scale amounts to the crime of aggression".

However, one paragraph of the letter was blacked out prior to its release to news organisations.

Channel 4 News said the missing section said Wilmshurst's views were the same as "what the attorney general gave us to understand was his view prior to his letter of 7th of March".

The letter appears to confirm previous reports that as late as March 7, 2003 Lord Goldsmith was of the belief that war would be illegal.

However, on March 17 he issued a written statement setting out a legal basis for the war.

Straw's statement

The foreign secretary said that Wilmshurst's resignation was "an honourable course to take".

Initial requests for access to her resignation letter were initially refused because it contained personal data, Straw said.

But after leaks to the media the department decided to publish the letter without two sentences relating to legal advice on the war.

Straw insisted the information was covered by exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act.

"It was entirely proper for the government to withhold information under the provisions of this Act," he said.

The foreign secretary declined to go into any details over whether the attorney general changed his view.

But he said that the letter did not prove Lord Goldsmith had changed his mind on the war. "It showed nothing of the kind," Straw said.

He also said the issue of legal advice on the war was clearly addressed in the Butler report.

Straw said Saddam Hussein had "not fully complied" with UN resolutions.

Lord Goldsmith's independent view was that as a result of this, the decision to go to war was lawful.

'Cover up'

Shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve, who called for the urgent question, asked why the letter was selectively "covered up".

The Conservative spokesman demanded to know "what made the attorney general change his mind?" and accused Straw of failing to "understand the corrosive effect" on public trust in politicians.

"Ms Wilmshurst makes clear that the attorney general changed his mind twice," he told MPs.

Between March 7 and March 17  Lord Goldsmith was understood to have met Downing Street allies Lord Falconer and Baroness Morgan.

"What was said in the intervening period?" Grieve demanded to know.

He said only publication of the "entire paper trail" would prove the lawyer was not "leant on".

Straw replied that the Conservatives were "moving to a position where law officers' advice should be published".

"When we discussed the freedom of information issue the House was very clear that legal advice should not be published for very good reasons," he said.

However he added that "there was a change of fact which was before the House on the 18th of March" when the Commons voted on the war.

"What changed between the 7th of March and the 17th of March was that consensus became impossible" at the UN security council, Straw said.

The Liberal Democrats pointed out that UN secretary general Kofi Annan had claimed the war was illegal.

"It is not surprising that the attorney general agreed with him," foreign affairs spokesman Michael Moore said.