that was the moment when you and other members of the cabinet, except of course the late robin cook, who resigned, accepted shared responsibility for the decision to go to war with iraq and if you look back from that point, do you feel that there should have been a cabinet committee set up before the conflict happened? one was set up immediately afterwards to deal with this but people like you should have been represented on i think -- if i'm right in interpreting your answers, you haven't actually been to mr. blair's ad hoc meetings on the subject that he told us about. you were not at his meeting in april 2002, which was an important one and on july 23 2002 which was an important one. yet the cabinet now had to make this very big decision over whether or not to go to war. shouldn't you have been cut in earlier? >> the chancellor has never been on this these committees. i don't think it happened previously. >> on what cabinets in the past? >> when it came to the war cabinet being constituted, the chancellor was, as i understand its previously, the chancellors under previous governme

. >> on the intelligence, which you mentioned, robin cook, of course, had raised concerns about the way the intelligence was being interpreted. he had actually challenged this. were you aware of the time of his concerns that he discussed -- did he discuss them with you? . . . at that time ahead full briefings from the intelligence services. i was given information deemed plausible at the time. >> bill was a statement that was from before we learned the intelligence was faulty. he challenged whether it was correct in the house of commons and he kept a distance himself with no accountability. >> i think we knew that there were objections because he felt the sanctions, the non-military road, should be pursued. i think the question of the intelligence emerged more after the investigation took place into what happened that led the intelligence services to complete certain things. intelligence is a guide, but it cannot be the only thing by which you make decisions. >> from the five briefings that you had from the papers that you read and received, like other members of cabinet, were you convi

stevan of the intelligence that he mentioned, robin cook of course had raised concerns up the way the intelligence was being interpreted. he had actually challenged this. were you aware of the time of his concerns that he discussed them with you? >> robin's of usis understand it was the policy of sanctions in the no-fly zone a better way of dealing with problem. >> did he cleared the intelligence, to back? >> i do not recall a conversation with robert about the intelligence. he may have mentioned that at the cabinet. i cannot recall that. but i do know that when all i had questions to ask about the intelligence and i reported the meetings i had with the intelligence services, they were telling me information that had not leave and confirmed by their security services by other countries security services as well. we subsequently discovered the sources of these intelligence reports to a number of different intelligence authorities that were probably the same and the wrong sources but at that time, i had full briefings from the intelligence services and i was given information that seeme

that was the moment when you and other members of the cabinet, except of course the late robin cook,resigned, accepted shared responsibility for the decision to go to war with iraq and if you look back from that point, do you feel that there should have been a cabinet committee set up before the conflict happened? one was set up immediately afterwards to deal with this but people like you should have been represented on i think -- if i'm right in interpreting your answers, you haven't actually been to mr. blair's ad hoc meetings on the subject that he told us about. you were not at his meeting in april 2002, which was an important one and on july 23 2002 which was an important one. yet the cabinet now had to make this very big decision over whether or not to go to war. shouldn't you have been cut in earlier? >> the chancellor has never been on this these committees. i don't think it happened previously. >> on what cabinets in the past? >> when it came to the war cabinet being constituted, the chancellor was, as i understand its previously, the chancellors under previous governments h