Inquiries will not silence critics

By Nick Assinder BBC News Online political correspondent

Tony Blair is furious at claims he lied over weapons

It now looks certain Tony Blair is going to face two inquiries into his handling of the war in Iraq and the issue of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

After bluntly ruling out a public inquiry, it appears the prime minister is about to announce that parliament's intelligence committee is investigating the issue in its own right.

Simultaneously the Commons foreign affairs select committee is to probe the way government presented intelligence evidence about Saddam's weapons capability.

The security committee will remain a private investigation reporting directly to Mr Blair and will have access to all relevant evidence including intelligence.

The foreign affairs committee, on the other hand, is more public and high profile and has the potential to cause the government greater difficulty.

It will be able to call witnesses from the prime minister down to give evidence and to demand all relevant documents.

But it cannot force anyone to appear before it and it is virtually certain that Mr Blair would resist such a request.

Embarrassing probe?

However, whether he likes it or not the prime minister can no longer avoid what is certain to develop into a long and potentially embarrassing investigation.

The decision by two US senate committees to hold inquiries into the conflict had already strengthened demands from the government's critics for a similar investigation here.

But the latest announcement in the UK may still fail to satisfy the prime minister's fiercest critics who are demanding a full-blooded public inquiry.

That could have taken a couple of possible forms.

Only weeks after the Falklands war ended in 1982, the then prime minister Margaret Thatcher set up the Franks committee to carry out just such an inquiry.

Her government, and she personally, had faced a great deal of criticism for their handling of the conflict.

If it's good enough for Bush.

Now, Tony Blair's critics are asking, if it was good enough for Lady Thatcher and is good enough for President Bush, then why not for him?

The Franks committee had wide ranging terms of reference to examine virtually everything it felt necessary.

It was headed by Lord Franks, included two former Labour and two former Tory ministers, and two senior civil servants.

It sat in private and had access to all documents it demanded, and interviewed everyone involved from the prime minister down including intelligence operatives.

Critics fear such an approach would, in effect, shut down the entire issue for months on end.

They would prefer the full judicial committee similar to the Scott inquiry into the arms to Iraq affair under the previous Tory administration.

That would take most of its evidence in public and have the power to call for documents and witnesses.

Troublesome?

It could also last for months, but would provide precisely the sort of running commentary on the affair that Downing Street wants to avoid.

While it still appears highly unlikely the prime minister will sanction an inquiry along either of those lines he is now facing a more public probe than he would have hoped for.

He may have been ready to live with the security committee's investigation but he is likely to find the foreign affairs committee's inquiry far more troublesome.

This remains a dangerously unpredictable affair with the prime minister's credibility on the line like never before.