Should the Iraq Cabinet papers be released?

Attorney General Dominic Grieve has blocked the release of minutes from Cabinet meetings held in the run up to Iraq War in 2003.

Grieve, the only minister with access to Cabinet minutes from the previous government, used his "exceptional" veto to block a call by the Information Commissioner to release the documents.

A similar order was made by Labour's Jack Straw in 2009. Grieve said the veto was still needed because the case for disclosure was "outweighed by the strong interest in protecting the conditions necessary for effective cabinet government and thereby encouraging high-quality decision-making at the highest level".

But Information Commissioner Christopher Graham, who said there was significant public interest in the release of the documents, was disappointed at the use of the ministerial veto.

Clare Short, Tony Blair's former International Development Secretary, also said the documents should be released.

Poll result:

Should the Iraq Cabinet papers be released? Poll Result: Yes 71%, No 29%

Yes 71%
No 29%

HAVE YOUR SAY

Iraq had to be done. It is now in the past. At least we had a prime minister prepared to defend the country, and remove criminals whenever possible. Unlike the current do nothings who are paralyzed on Syrian policy and dumped all our defence capability. Don't want to know about the cabinet papers. Claire Short needs to grow up.
Bob Hex - Peterborugh

I think in this instance, where there appears to be a good possibility that both Parliament and the public were mis-led about the size and make up of Iraqi WMD, its ability to deliver the WMD any meaningful range outside its own borders (eg Western Europe / UK), means that the minutes should be released so that the people responsible for making the decisions can be hled accountable for those decisions and explain why they manipulated the data available in the way they did.
Rob - Telford

Bob Hex - Peterborugh

How were they defending the country? How could the current government intervene in Syria without a UN Mandate?
Rob - Telford

Yes because at the end of the day if we are ever to truely believe those we hire to run the country for us, they need to be open, transparent and accountable for their decisions when sending people off to war.
JC - UK

Family "business" was stopped. A chance was given to Iraq we missed out on in 1991.

Saddam was a "Weapon of Mass Destruction " himself and sometimes we seem to overlook that point.

Perhaps we need to find a way to do the same with Syria, and stop the "Family Business"
Degradable - UK

I submitted both Freedom of Information requests for these Cabinet minutes (2007 and 2011).

Jack Straw's reference to protecting the confidentiality principle of Cabinet collective responsibility in imposing his veto in 2009 was both mendacious and hypocritical in that such 'collective responsibility' had already been wholly undermined by Blair's sofa government (as pointed out by the Butler report). It was Straw, himself, who persuaded the Attorney General not to give the full legal advice to Cabinet for its deliberation on 17 March.

I am afraid that Grieve's reliance on Straw only shows the hopelessness of his case.The objective of both vetos has been not to protect the 'conditions for effective Cabinet government' but to prevent a lamentable Cabinet surrender to excessive Prime Ministerial power from being exposed.
Chris Lamb - Bristol