Cabinet (Meetings)

First Minister's Question Time – in the Scottish Parliament at 12:00 pm on 28 April 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party 12:00, 28 April 2005

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1597)

Photo of Rt Hon Jack McConnell Rt Hon Jack McConnell Labour

The Cabinet will meet briefly next Wednesday and discuss issues of importance.

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

On 20 March 2003, the First Minister praised the United Kingdom Government for being the first Government "in living memory" to

"put the possibility of going to war to a vote in the House of Commons".—[Official Report, 20 March 2003; c 19800.]

Does the First Minister agree that MPs should have been made aware of the grave doubts that we now know the Attorney General had about the legality of the war in Iraq before they were asked to vote to send our servicemen and servicewomen to war?

Photo of George Reid George Reid None

I make it clear at this point that the First Minister is responsible for what he says in Parliament and in the country, but not for what others say elsewhere.

Photo of Pauline McNeill Pauline McNeill Labour

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. If you allow this question to be debated at First Minister's question time, I insist that you allow the same latitude to back benchers.

Photo of George Reid George Reid None

I made it clear that the First Minister is responsible for what he says in the chamber and for what he says in the country. He is not responsible for advice given by the Attorney General to Government at UK level. The question is, therefore, to Mr McConnell.

Photo of Rt Hon Jack McConnell Rt Hon Jack McConnell Labour

I am not responsible for that advice, but I am happy to refer to the fact that that advice was published this morning. Ms Sturgeon will see from what was published that what she claims is, in fact, wrong. I said at that time—and I absolutely adhere to that position today—that it was right and proper for this British Government to be the first ever to put a decision to go to war to a vote in Parliament and to secure the support of the British Parliament for that decision. I have absolutely no doubt that that was a tough decision for the Prime Minister to take and that that difficult decision was not made lightly. I also have absolutely no doubt that members of Parliament from all parties, when they voted on that decision in the House of Commons, voted having given it due consideration. Ultimately, I believe that they made the right decision.

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

I make it clear that my line of questioning is entirely based on comments made by the First Minister in this chamber. This is a question of whether the UK Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and the public were given the facts about the reasons for, and the legality of, the war in Iraq.

On 13 March 2003, the First Minister left us in no doubt that he thought that United Nations resolution 1441 provided, if necessary, a legal basis for war. He said that there was

"no doubt that it was a serious and final declaration."—[Official Report, 13 March 2003; c 19435.]

Before he made that unequivocal statement to the Parliament and to the Scottish people, had the First Minister seen or asked to see any legal advice from the Attorney General to back it up?

Photo of Rt Hon Jack McConnell Rt Hon Jack McConnell Labour

No, of course I had not, but I absolutely stand by that judgment. I quote for Ms Sturgeon what the Attorney General himself said last night, without even the additional information that we have this morning. The Attorney General said last night that what the document published yesterday does,

"as in any legal advice, is to go through the complicated arguments" that led to his view. Far from showing that he

"reached the conclusion that to go to war would be unlawful," it shows how he

"took account of all the arguments" before reaching any conclusions. That is exactly what any Government expects from its law officers. If Ms Sturgeon is claiming that the Government went to war on the basis of an untruth, or something that was hidden from the public, she is calling the Attorney General, not the Prime Minister, a liar. If she is calling the Attorney General a liar, that is a very serious accusation indeed to make of a law officer.

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

I was asking the First Minister about the legal basis for the comments that he made in this chamber on 13 March 2003. I asked him that question for a reason. We now know that the only legal advice that the Attorney General had issued at that time was issued on 7 March. On 7 March—just six days before the First Minister said that there was no doubt about resolution 1441—the Attorney General said that

"the language of resolution 1441 leaves the position unclear".

In other words, there was very real doubt. Does the First Minister not feel angry that he was not made aware of what, at that time, was the Attorney General's only legal advice and, as a result, was put in the position—albeit inadvertently—of misleading this Parliament?

Photo of George Reid George Reid None

This is getting skewed for reasons that we all understand. I will take Mr Lyon's point of order.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

As the First Minister is responsible for the Executive's policy, how can he comment on events and issues that were decided at the Houses of Parliament in Westminster? Ms Sturgeon is straying far from the subject of what the First Minister said in this Parliament. Presiding Officer, it is time that you took action and ruled this out of order.

Photo of George Reid George Reid None

As I have made clear before, the First Minister is responsible for what he says in Parliament and in the country. He is not responsible for advice that is given to the United Kingdom Government. I leave it to the First Minister to reply or not, at which point I might be moved to move on.

Photo of Carolyn Leckie Carolyn Leckie SSP

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I think that we should have some consistency here, because it appears that your authority is being challenged. I have been chucked out for less. [ Interruption. ] I will repeat that, because members were laughing. I have been chucked out for less. What about George Lyon?

Photo of George Reid George Reid None

Before we move on, I ask the First Minister whether he has anything to add.

Photo of Rt Hon Jack McConnell Rt Hon Jack McConnell Labour

It is clear to everyone that Ms Sturgeon would rather debate matters from another place than debate the responsibilities that we have in this Parliament. It is critical that we ensure that the Parliament debates critical issues such as growing the Scottish economy, improving our health and education services and tackling crime.

However, I am also very happy to answer for what I say in this Parliament and elsewhere. I am clear that my opinion, which I genuinely held at the time, is one that I stand by today. I have known Iraqi civilians for more than 25 years and know that today they are freer, live in a more democratic society, are happier to return home and are pleased with the action that the British Government took. I stand with them now, just as I did then.