Key quotes: Blair's evidence

Here are the key quotes as Prime Minister Tony Blair gives evidence to the Hutton inquiry into the death of the government weapons expert Dr David Kelly

Asked whether he had discussed with Alastair Campbell the structure of the dossier before the first dossier meeting chaired by Campbell on 5 September 2002:

I think I had discussed it in outline at least that it was important that it dealt with Iraq and the question of weapons of mass destruction. We would obviously have to deal with main elements of that because that after all was our case.... I knew that it was a document owned by the JIC (Joint Intelligence Committee) and the chairman John Scarlett. That was obviously important because we could not produce this on evidence that came from anything other than an objective source

On his foreword to the dossier:

I am very careful in my statement to make it clear what we were and were not saying... the purpose of the dossier was to respond to the call to disclose intelligence that we knew, but at that stage, the strategy was not to use the dossier as the immediate reason for going to conflict

On the BBC Today programme claim the dossier had been "sexed up":

This was an absolutely fundamental charge... this extraordinarily serious allegation which if it were true would mean we had behaved in the most disgraceful way, and I would have to resign as prime minister

Asked what he was initially told had been broadcast on the Today programme:

The things that absolutely stood out and were extraordinary, in my view, were one, that this had been - the 45 minute claim had been - inserted into the dossier at the behest of Number 10 Downing Street. Two that it was done by us - I think the words were "probably knowing" - that it was wrong, and three that we had done it contrary to the wishes of the intelligence services

On the atmosphere at the time:

There was a raging storm going on

Asked about what impression he got of the Today report:

Yes, well, I mean you know, look, any person listening to that would think that we had done something improper not that we just got the facts mixed up. I mean in my submission, I think that anyone who listened to that - this was the purpose of it. The whole thing since then has been not did the government get this wrong but did the government dupe us?

On the failure of the denial to put the claim "to bed":

What really from that moment on made the thing extremely difficult was that there was then a Mail On Sunday article by Mr Gilligan that named Alastair Campbell as the person who had done this effectively... with all due deference to the media and everyone, the insertion of Alastair's name... once you put that into the pot with everything else, you have something that's no longer a small item. The combination of these things, both the original report and the sunday newspaper follow-up... frankly since then that's been the issue. We are three months on and it's still the issue... we were then in a complete and full storm.

Counsel for the inquiry, James Dingemans asked Blair whether he had known beforehand about Campbell's interview on Channel 4:

Yes. He phoned me shortly before and asked for my permission to do it and I gave my permission for him to do it.

Mr Dingemans asked if the Channel 4 appearance had escalated the dispute:

To be frank I think it was pretty - it was pretty much there already, the dispute. I would - one point I would like to emphasise throughout is for us it was not the - the dispute was not important. It was important to refute the story.

Asked about the high level meetings to discuss whether to tell the Foreign Affairs Committee an official had come forward:

I think there was a real concern on the part of everyone... we were in a quandary frankly right from the very beginning...the FAC is about to report on the Monday, the report is going to deal precisely with the Gilligan allegations and here is somebody who suddenly emerges as the person who may be the source of those allegations

On a conversation with chairman of BBC governors Gavin Davies:

On the morning of 7 July I had an entirely private conversation with Gavyn Davies the chairman of the BBC at my request, to see if there was some way we could find a way through this. It was a perfectly amicable discussion but we were not able to come to an agreement. We both agreed that it was important to try and calm things down. I said look, is not the sensible way through this, whatever we think about your original broadcast and allegations, for you to say: we stand by our right to broadcast the story but we accept that the story was wrong. He felt he couldn't do that. he couldn't retract the orginal story. That would compromise the BBC's independence.

Once Dr Kelly had come forward a meeting was held with Sir David Omand and others to decide what to do.

There was a discussion about it and I think the consensus was that the best way was for David Omand to write to the chairman of the ISC (intelligence and security committee), copy it to the FAC (foreign affairs committee) for courtesy, and then make public the fact that the source had come forward.

He was asked why there was a need to make public that the source had come forward:

My concern was to get that information not concealed but out there, so that no one could say afterwards that this was something that you people were trying to conceal or cover from a House of Commons committee. that was the view of the meeting. I take full responsibility for decisions. I stand by them. I believe they were the right decisions. But the advice of Sir david in particular who was the key person for me was that it would have been improper to have withheld this from the FAC.

Asked about the Foreign Affairs Committee report which cleared, in a split vote, Alastair Campbell of inserting the 45 minute claim into the dossier:

The trouble with the FAC report, rather as I had anticipated at the outset, was that it split on party lines. Yes, it is true you could say by a majority they had cleared the government; but it was - I think the next day the coverage frankly was imbalanced, probably negative. It was at best a muddied and certainly you would not have in any shape or form thought the next day - well that is the government in the clear.

On why a press statement was put out saying an official had come forward, but without naming Dr Kelly:

I think it was decided to do this by way of a public statement not mentioning the name, a) because we were not entirely clear, b) I think to give at least a little bit of time to us. But the important thing was at least the fact someone had come forward saying 'I am the source' was no longer something we possessed. We had actually been open and said this is the case.... we did not want to keep this information quiet on the other hand, we had taken the view we do not put the name out straight away, which is an alternative way of doing it. You know, in fairness to the MOD press people I think it was difficult for them. It was difficult for them.

In reply to Mr Dingemans asking why any further details needed to be given about the identity of Dr Kelly:

The original allegation was that this was someone in charge of drawing up the dossier and so I think there was some anxiety within the MOD that you might have a whole lot of speculation going on about other people being the source.