Sir John Chilcot
has attempted to explain to families of British soldiers killed in Iraq
why his inquiry is taking so long to complete.
In a statement, he said responses from those criticised in the report had opened up new lines of inquiry.
But he declined to set out a timetable for publication despite legal threats from the families.
Roger Bacon, whose son Major Matthew Bacon was killed in Iraq in 2005, said he was "disappointed" by the statement.
"I'm not sure he is able to understand our anguish," said Mr Bacon.
The
families had threatened legal action unless Sir John set out a
timetable on Wednesday. He has written to the families giving his
reasons for the hold-up.
Sir John said he would not be making the contents of that letter public.
New issues'
But he issued a
statement in response to their concerns, blaming the "Maxwellisation"
process - where those criticised are given an opportunity to respond -
for the delays.
"Individuals have not been given an open-ended timescale and Maxwellisation is not a process of negotiation.
"The inquiry has remained in control of its
deadlines throughout the process. In some cases, the response sent to us
required detailed and complex analysis which has taken time."
He
said the process had identified government documents "which had not been
submitted to the inquiry and which have in some cases opened up new
issues".
But he added: "We expect to receive the last responses to our Maxwellisation letters shortly.
"That
will allow us to complete our consideration of the responses, to decide
what further work will be needed, and to provide the prime minister and
thus Parliament and the public with a timetable for the publication of
our work."
Anguish'
When the inquiry was launched in 2009, then prime minister Gordon Brown said it would take at least a year.
Sir
John said he understood "the anguish of the families of those who lost
their lives in the conflict", but added "it is critically important that
the report should be fair".
He has faced a barrage of criticism in recent weeks, with Prime Minister David Cameron expressing his frustration at the delays.
Clare Short, who was international development
secretary at the time of the 2003 invasion, said she did not believe the
Maxwellisation process was the real reason for the hold-up.
The
former minister is among those criticised in the report but she said the
idea people were "endlessly being consulted I think is not true".
"I
think what might be true is that the draft is very poor and it's as big
as War and Peace I understand, lots of people have made serious
responses and they are probably having to redraft," she told BBC Radio 4's The World at One.
"But
I think the hope of it being a good piece of work that Britain learns
what went wrong and we don't do it again looks very, very poor to me."
Blair criticism
All
of those criticised had to reply to the inquiry within a deadline of a
few weeks which had passed "a long time ago," she added.
She
confirmed that she had received a draft copy of a section of the report
that criticises her some time ago and that other individuals who were
named would have seen sections relevant to them.
Earlier, the Guardian reported that the finished report will spread criticism well beyond Tony Blair and his inner circle of advisers.
Among
those who could be in focus are the Labour former Foreign Secretary,
Jack Straw, Sir Richard Dearlove, then head of MI6, Sir John Scarlett,
chairman of the joint intelligence committee, Geoff Hoon who was defence
secretary, as well as Ms Short.
No comments:
Post a Comment