Iraq row returns

Tony Blair's troubles over Iraq reignited today, with fresh questions over the misuse of intelligence and the legality of the war.

Dr Brian Jones, the star witness of the Hutton Inquiry, weighed into the row after new documents showed that the Attorney General changed his mind on the conflict a fortnight before the invasion.

Dr Jones, the intelligence expert who objected to the Government's exaggerated claims about Saddam's arsenal, said the revelations proved that new questions had to be asked about the war.

Writing exclusively for the Standard, he also warned that lessons in the weapons of mass destruction-fiasco have still not been learned and accused Mr Blair of misleading the public over the issue. Only "cosmetic" changes have been made, he said.

The resignation letter of Foreign Office lawyer Elizabeth Wilmshurst revealed Lord Goldsmith had agreed with her that a second UN resolution was needed.

Dr Jones, the former Ministry of Defence expert on WMD, electrified the Hutton Inquiry when he revealed he had complained about the Government's dossier on Iraq in 2002. The scientist objected to claims that Saddam was continuing to produce chemical weapons, but he was ignored by his bosses.

Lord Butler's inquiry into the intelligence failures praised Dr Jones and recommended a big shake-up in the way Whitehall and ministers worked to prevent the blunders ever happening again.

In its long-awaited response to the Butler report, the Government claimed yesterday to have overhauled the whole machinery.

But Dr Jones was today scathing about the response, accusing Mr Blair of putting up a " smokescreen" while failing to admit his own role in exaggerating the case against Saddam. "At first sight, the actions taken and proposed, whilst commendable in themselves, will do little or nothing to tackle the underlying problems which I believe resulted in the Prime Minister presenting a deeply flawed description of Iraq's WMD programmes and capabilities before the war," he told the Standard.

"These problems did not lie with the intelligence community at large but with its leaders and their relationship to policymakers."

The Foreign Office yesterday said in future more effort would be made to separate politics from intelligence, and there would be less "sofa" government where decisions are made informally, while a staff counsellor would be available for disgruntled officials.

But Dr Jones dismisses most of the Government's so-called reforms, pointing out that it has ignored Lord Butler's key request for the MoD's defence intelligence staff to be given more money and independence. He also calls for Parliament to have much more power to scrutinise the intelligence services.

New light was also shed today on the Attorney General's dramatic and rapid change of heart on the legality of war.

The resignation letter of Ms Wilmshurst - who quit as the Foreign Office's legal chief on the eve of war - backs the view that Lord Goldsmith DID change his mind about invading Iraq just when the Government desperately needed him to.

On 7 March, Lord Goldsmith produced a lengthy legal opinion arguing that a case could be made for war without a second resolution, but added it could be open to legal challenge.

By 13 March - four days before war - he had hardened his view to say war was legal without any qualifications.

But a censored extract from Ms Wilmshurt's letter shows Lord Goldsmith had agreed with her that the war would be illegal without specific UN backing.

The deleted passage read: "My views accord with the advice that has been given consistently in this office (the foreign office legal team office) before and after the adoption of UN Security Council resolution 1441 and with what the Attorney General gave us to understand was his view prior to his letter of 7 March."

Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell questioned why the Government had blanked out Ms Wilmshurst's comments when it first published her letter.

"The Government blacked out that section not in the public interest but in the Government interest," he said.

"The Government is severely embarrassed by the fact that there is continuing controversy about the legal advice given by the Attorney General and the way he arrived at his opinion."

Former International Development Secretary Clare Short said: "I think the Government had to try and cover it up because it is so devastating."