In July 2003, I wrote an article for the New Statesman, The difference a day made, pointing out a big hole in the government’s defence to the claim that its spin doctors had put the notorious 45 minutes claim in the dossier. It had emerged that top spin doctor Alastair Campbell had chaired a meeting on the dossier on 9 September 2002, the day before Joint Intelligence Committee chairman John Scarlett had produced what was claimed to be both the first draft of the dossier and the first draft to include the claim. In observing that this wrecked Campbell’s alibi, I was only half right: the spin doctors did put the claim in the dossier that day, but different spin doctors at a different meeting.

It is now clear that the meeting at which the spin doctors suggested the inclusion of the claim was that of the dossier drafting group, on the afternoon of 9 September, where Campbell’s meeting took place that morning. The drafting meeting was attended by up to four spin doctors named in a June 2003 letter from Scarlett to Tony Blair as having been "involved" in drafting the dossier. They included including Foreign Office press secretary John Williams, who then produced his own draft of the dossier, which now appears to have been both the first draft of the dossier and the first draft to include the claim.

In my original article, I reported the Foreign Affairs Committee’s description of how a formal JIC paper that cited the claim was "discussed at a meeting on 9 September 2002". It now appears that this was the drafting meeting as the JIC paper was issued at exactly the time that that meeting started – 2pm that afternoon. It was "immediately after" the spin doctors saw the claim that it went in the dossier, probably in Williams’ draft.

During the Hutton Inquiry, I watched as many clues to the involvement of Williams and others in the actual drafting of the dossier emerged. When it emerged that Williams had written his own draft dossier the day before the one on which the government had based its whole case, it seemed obvious that this document must be significant, but no-one at the inquiry or in the media seemed to notice. Everyone seemed to fall for Campbell’s spin that these people were outside the loop. Even the (very late) disclosure of Scarlett’s letter to Blair, which left no doubt that Williams et al were on the inside of the process made no difference.

It is quite possible that within the next few weeks the government will be forced to release the Williams draft, because the Information Commissioner’s imminent decision will leave no doubt about its significance. The Information Tribunal has recently ordered the BBC to release the minutes of the post-Hutton governors meeting, overturning in the process the Commissioner’s very conservative approach to the same (Section 36) exemption that Jack Straw used in my case. An appeal in that direction would probably be seen for what it is, an attempt to delay further and an implicit admission of guilt. It may be that those who hope to be in government after Blair will realise how stupid it would be to move the inevitable "hit" nearer the election.

But in more realistic moments, I worry that for the most part the political and media establishment still doesn’t get it, doesn’t realise that the Williams draft could be the smoking gun or that confirmation that the spin doctors were actually drafting the dossier proves that it was sexed-up after all and that there has been a huge cover-up.

Today should be an important day for those of us who want to know the truth about the Iraq dossier

– the document that took us to war. The New Statesman is publishing my follow-up piece to Martin Bright’s story last November about the secret first draft, written by former Foreign Office spin doctor John Williams. At the same time, the Information Commissioner is finalising his ruling on whether the draft should be released. To mark all this, this website iraqdossier.com, which tells the whole story of how the dossier was sexed-up, is launched.

Today has been quite a day, starting off with publication of my piece in the New Statesman. Then Martin Bright was kind enough to lend me his blog and I did a another piece for Comment is Free, with the downside that they wanted my picture.

Reaction has been good and a few other blogs/sites have linked to the story and this site:

• Ian Dale's Diary
• Blairwatch
• Obsolete
• the durruti column
• Liberal England

It's all helped to get a lot of attention for the site and, most gratifying, people understand that it is a very serious and properly researched piece of work.

No word from the Information Commissioner. Watch this space!

Is the 45 minutes claim in the missing draft of the dossier produced by John Williams?

Following up my investigations, Lib Dem shadow Foreign Secretary Michael Moore asked Margaret Beckett what would appear to be a straightforward enough question: "whether the first draft of the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction dossier authored by John Williams makes reference to Iraq's ability to deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes."

Beckett responded with a classic non-denial: "There are no plans for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to publish Mr. Williams' draft document, extracts from it or to confirm details of the contents."

Given that for Williams to have inserted the notorious claim in his draft the dossier would make it - as I have said - the smoking gun to end all smoking guns, you might think that the Foreign Office would deny this if possible. You might think Beckett would at least deny that the Williams draft was the first draft. You might think she would at least say "no plans to confirm or deny". Is this non-denial tantamount to an admission? Is Beckett burying herself deeper in the mire by perpetuating the cover-up?

Interestingly, the Theworkforyou website is running a poll on whether Beckett has answered the question. At present 2 (and I'm one of them) think not, while no-one thinks she has. What do you think?

To Coincide with the publication of The smoking gun on Comment is Free, The Foreign Affairs Committee inquiry gives a detailed account of how Jack Straw, the Foreign Office and Alastair Campbell misled that Committee about the origins of the dossier and the 45 minutes claim in particular.

In response to a number of very good questions from John Baron MP about the Williams draft, Margaret Beckett, who is nominally "Foreign Secretary", has shown an inclination to ignore Dennis Healey's advice "When you're in a hole, stop digging".

Beckett's answer to all five questions

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 25 January 2007, Official Report, column 1957W, on the weapons of mass destruction dossier

1. why she has no plans to publish Mr. John Williams’ draft document, extracts from it, or to confirm details of the contents; why the draft document was not made available to the inquiry led by Lord Hutton; and whether her Department retains the document;
2. whether the draft of the dossier on weapons of mass destruction produced by the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Mr. John Scarlett, on 10 September 2002 (a) was based upon and (b) took into account the draft document produced by Mr. John Williams on 9 September 2002;
3. whether reference was made to Iraq’s ability to deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes in (a) an assessment by the Joint Intelligence Committee prior to 9 September 2002, (b) a draft of the dossier by the Joint Intelligence Committee prior to 9 September 2002, (c) the draft document produced by Mr. John Williams on 9 September 2002 and (d) the draft document produced by Mr. John Scarlett on 10 September 2002;
4. who the author was of the executive summary of the dossier on weapons of mass destruction in September 2002;
5. who the members were of the dossier on weapons of mass destruction drafting group in September 2002; at which meeting the dossier was signed off on behalf of the group; and which members of the group were present at that meeting.

was:

Matters relating to the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) dossier were examined in great detail by the inquiry led by Lord Hutton, Lord Butler’s "Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction" and the Intelligence and Security Committee’s report "Iraqi WMD—Intelligence and Assessments". These inquiries placed into the public domain as much information as it was possible to do without prejudicing national security.

Quite laughable really but Beckett has implied (otherwise she is misleading parliament) that it was a deliberate decision on national security grounds to withhold the draft from Hutton.

She is also again refusing to deny that the 45 minutes claim is in the draft and refusing to deny that the draft was the basis for the Scarlett draft that followed it.

On the whole, digging herself further into the cover-up.

Yesterday, John Baron MP had a chance to ask an oral question at Foreign Office questions:

In answer to my written questions, the Foreign Secretary has again refused either to publish the draft dossier, written by John Williams, a press officer in her Department, on 9 September 2002, or to explain why those papers were not made available to the Hutton inquiry. The reason cited for the refusal is national security, but how can the Minister justify that cloak of secrecy when the paper was a draft document intended for publication, and when previous and subsequent drafts have been made available? Or is the real reason because the Williams draft was the first to mention the 45-minute claim and was the basis for John Scarlett’s draft the following day?

Minister Kim Howells once again declined to deny that the 45 minutes claim is in the Williams draft but answered:

Lord Hutton had access to all documents he wished to see. Both John Scarlett and John Williams referred to the draft dossier in their evidence sessions. There is, therefore, no question of its existence being hidden from the inquiry.

Unfortunately for Howells, Williams did not mention the draft during his Hutton evidence.

Howells has not only misled Parliament. When he is forced to apologise, he will draw attention to the cover-up.

In last week's House of Commons debate on the dossier, Foreign Office minister Kim Howells gave a categorical assurance that the suppressed first draft of the dossier by spin doctor John Williams did not make reference to the notorious 45 minutes claim.

In the light of this, and other revelations, I have rewritten the pages on this site on the Williams draft and how the 45 minutes claim got in the dossier to make clear that the main relevance of the former to the latter is that it shows that the claim was indeed not in the original draft. The Williams draft remains highly relevant in showing that spin doctors like Williams were on the inside of the drafting process.