'Taleban overthrow not clear aim'

There are concerns aid efforts are being obstructed

The overthrow of Afghanistan's ruling Taleban is not a clear objective of the coalition military campaign, Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott has told MPs.

Standing in for Tony Blair at prime minister's question time in the Commons, said the government had clearly set out its war aims on the day Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith accused ministers of sending out "confusing messages".

The objectives are clear, and the one about the removal of the Taleban is not something we have as a clear objective to implement

John Prescott

Facing Mr Prescott across the despatch box, deputy Tory leader Michael Ancram said the best way of averting a humanitarian disaster was to replace the Taleban with a broad-based government.

He asked whether the first aim of the military campaign was removing the Taleban, which was the "biggest obstacle" to the aid effort.

Mr Prescott replied: "The objectives are clear, and the one about the removal of the Taleban is not something we have as a clear objective to implement.

'Possible consequence'

"But it is possibly a consequence that will flow from the Taleban clearly giving protection to Bin Laden."

He told MPs the United Nations itself was now looking at arrangements for future government in Afghanistan, something that would need consensus among the country's Islamic neighbours.

Prescott: Military objectives are clear

Taking up the mantle set down earlier by Mr Duncan Smith, Mr Ancram argued the air strikes had been a successful first phase to degrade the Taleban's military capability.

"But the time has now come to set out clearly the specific objectives of the next phase, which will presumably involve the use of ground forces," he continued.

Mr Prescott agreed over the achievements of the air campaign and said Tony Blair had made the aims for the "long haul" clear in his speech in Wales on Tuesday.

In that address, Mr Blair spoke of making "steady progress" against the Taleban and terror during the winter.

'Accountability ditched'

The Commons exchange also saw Mr Ancram attack the government's decision to abandon its practice of publishing an annual report.

He quoted Mr Prescott describing the first annual report in 1998 as a move to increase "democratic accountability".

Mr Ancram continued: "What I want to know is whatever has happened to 'democratic accountability' since then?

Beith asks for more government u-turns

"Isn't it yet another victim of the Government's obsession with news management and spin, and hasn't the annual report become another piece of political bad news they have decided, without ceremony, to bury?"

Mr Prescott countered by pointing at Labour's second landslide victory in June and predicted a third win was on the way.

Manifesto message

"The reality is that we put our record in the manifesto. The criticism was by the Tory manifesto and the result was overwhelming - the same kind of result as we had at the beginning, the first election.

Meanwhile, the deputy prime minister came under pressure from the Liberal Democrats over the series of policy "reversals".

Deputy Lib Dem leader Alan Beith pointed to Railtrack, cannabis, and the voucher system for asylum seekers as examples of u-turns.

And he suggested the London Underground, air traffic control and free care for the elderly should be next on the list for u-turns.

He asked: "Is Labour's second term going to be devoted to undoing the more misguided policies of the first?"

Mr Prescott hit back, saying it was incompetence in handling the flawed privatisation at Railtrack that were to blame for the company going into administration - not the government.

And he gave a straight answer to the charge of changing policy: "If we do change in some things, is it so wrong?

"Whether it is cannabis or student financing, we look and see whether it is working, take proper advice and then act on that advice. That's what I would call good government."