Blair's integrity on the line as war doubts boil

LONDON - Secret advice questioning the legality of attacking Iraq given to the British Prime Minister has pushed the war and Tony Blair's honesty to the centre of the campaign with less than a week to polling day.

The advice to Blair from his Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, which was withheld even from senior members of the Cabinet, was leaked to a prime-time television programme yesterday.

Blair was still, in the latest polls, predicted to be returned for a third term with a comfortable majority of between 80 and 148 seats.

But the Iraq war, which caused huge anger particularly among core members of his Labour Party, reinforces the charge being levelled at him by the leader of the Opposition Conservative Party, Michael Howard, that he lies.

The Conservatives, guided by their Australian campaign director, Lynton Crosby, unveiled the "Liar" strategy on Tuesday, with posters showing a shifty-looking Blair.

So far the liar campaign has failed to shift opinion. A poll published yesterday showed 44 per cent of voters think Blair lies but are still preparing to vote for him, and 29 per cent think Howard lies.

The timing of the Iraq leak was masterly. It was given to Channel Four, for its 7pm news analysis programme, and was broadcast as the rival Sky News programme was airing a taped interview with Blair.

Channel Four put the document - still only part of Goldsmith's caveat-ridden advice - on to its website and rival broadcasters scrabbled to download and catch up.

The BBC claimed to have its own leak.

The document showed that Goldsmith, on March 7, 2003, told Blair he thought that, on balance, the war would be legal if there was new, concrete evidence of Saddam Hussein's continued defiance of United Nations resolutions and a second UN resolution. Even then it might not stand up in the courts.

On March 17, after the failure to achieve a second UN resolution, Goldsmith told the House of Commons he believed war against Iraq would be legal.

The argument highlighted by the leak is what happened between March 7 and 17 to harden his advice, whether he bowed to pressure from Blair to change and why the original, cautious advice was withheld from Cabinet ministers.

The effect of the leak on the campaign - which has so far failed to ignite much interest - is difficult to gauge before fresh opinion polls but it is likely to affect floating voters.

A pre-leak poll yesterday for the Financial Times indicated that more voters are still undecided than at the same point in the 2001 election and that the number of Conservative voters who say they will definitely vote has increased from 71 per cent a week ago to 80 per cent.

Turnout, particularly in marginal seats, is crucial. Only 64 per cent of Labour supporters, down 2 per cent, say they are certain to vote.

The Financial Times poll also showed - as Labour Party internal memos strategically leaked to the right-wing Sunday Times and to the pro-Blair Guardian had already indicated - that the Blair Government's position is less secure than national polls show.

The national polls give him 40 per cent, a comfortable 10 per cent lead over Howard, with the Liberal Democrats failing to shift from between 20 and 23 per cent even though their leader, Charles Kennedy, fleetingly grabbed the limelight by becoming a first-time father as the election was called.

The leaking of the Labour memo, which showed the Labour lead down to 2 per cent in key areas, was cynically perceived by veteran news watchers, not least BBC Radio Four's toughest early-morning broadcaster, John Humphreys, as spin, designed to frighten apathetic Labour supporters to the polling stations.

The campaign has been comically stage-managed. Blair and his Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, who notoriously loathe each other, are behaving like conjoined twins, even appearing in matching colours.

And the papers have predictably lined up behind their traditional parties.

Rupert Murdoch's Sun, which claims to have propelled Blair to power, declared its allegiance last week with a copycat Vatican chimney from which puffed red smoke.

A liar, or not?

TONY BLAIR
Prime Minister

* I have never told a lie.
* No. I don't intend to go telling lies to people.
* I did not lie over Iraq.

MICHAEL HOWARD
Conservative leader

* Asked if he was calling Blair a liar, he said: Yes.
* He has told lies to win elections. On the one thing on which he has taken a stand in the eight years he has been Prime Minister, which is taking us to war, he didn't even tell the truth on that.
* I think it was possible to go to war but to tell the truth, and Mr Blair did not tell the truth.
* May 5 is your chance to tell Mr Blair where to get off. I am not aware of any occasion when I have deliberately or knowingly misled people and that is the charge I make against Mr Blair.

CONSERVATIVE ELECTION POSTER

If he's prepared to lie to take us to war, he's prepared to lie to win an election.

KENNETH CLARKE
Former Tory Chancellor

* I have not used the word myself. I am an old parliamentarian.

RT REV RICHARD HARRIES
Bishop of Oxford

* The leaders of the three main parties are all honourable men. I think it is quite wrong to imply that any one of those three is somehow fundamentally dishonest. I think there's a great worry about using a phrase like "liar". That does imply somebody has deliberately told an untruth. That's very different from whatever degree of spin there might be.

CHARLES KENNEDY
Lib Dem leader

* I've not used that particular four-letter word. I'm not persuaded it's guaranteed to be true.
* Tony Blair was sincere in his views at the time but he was wrong in his views and political judgment.

GORDON BROWN
Chancellor

* Mr Blair did tell the truth.

- INDEPENDENT, REUTERS