Goldsmith’s evidence to the Iraq inquiry: memory is a funny thing

Just doing my homework ahead of Tony Blair’s evidence session at the Iraq Inquiry tomorrow and I came across yet another reminder of how memory is a funny thing.

Lord Goldsmith was questioned yesterday at the Iraq inquiry about the cabinet meeting when he finally was ushered into the room to share his brand new pro-war legal opinion with ministers (something he was discouraged from doing when his view was more off-message in the preceding months). Lord Goldsmith’s memory was that the questioning was pretty non-existent:

“What actually happened was that I started to go through the PQ, which had been handed out as this framework. Somebody, I can’t remember who it was, said, “You don’t need to do that. We can read it”. I was actually trying to use it as a sort of framework for explaining the position, and there was a question that was then put.

“I do recall telling Cabinet, “Well, there is another point of view, but this is the conclusion that I have reached”, and then the discussion on the legality simply stopped, and cabinet then went on to discuss all the other issues, the effect on international relations, domestic policy and all the rest of it.”

Compare that with Gordon Brown’s recollection of that cabinet, a bit closer to events. This is what he said on 28 April 2005, at a Labour general election press conference, the morning after Channel 4 News had published the conclusion of Lord Goldsmith’s earlier, much more equivocal legal opinion (not seen by most of the cabinet until they saw it on Channel 4 News):

“For once and for all the myth that there was no Cabinet involvement in this discussion can be set aside. Not only did we have the data available to us, and these were the results of what had happened since 7 March to 17 March, but we had the opportunity to quiz the attorney general on every aspect of it and I know there were questions asked of him and there were replies given by him.”