Any Iraq war inquiry must be focused on two objectives: the causes; and the conduct. Blair is the centre of attention for the causes. Brown is the centre of attention for the conduct (and the ignominious withdrawal).
It doesn't matter that it is held in secret. Secrets are made to become known. What matters is getting the pair of them pinned down hard with as much information as can be elicited under 'secrecy' assurances as possible - which is certainly more than would come out in any 'public' inquiry without quite savage powers of interrogation and capacity to require witnesses. Something on the lines of the French or Italian or Spanish interrogating magistrates powers would be needed for an effective public inquiry.
So Brown sets up an inquiry, that inter alia maximises the elicitation of information under conditions of 'secrecy', which he sees as pinning down his problem and adult life spoiler. And the inquiry blithely covers too the conduct of a war in which our troops had their capacity and efficiency blighted by denial of equipment and premature reduction in numbers, which he doesn't see fingers him as even worse than Blair in responsibility for long term damage to our country and its institutions. Meanwhile he is busy elsewhere facilitating UK entry into the Euro, Blair downed by the inquiry and the Saviour of the World stepping up to the European presidential plate.
Two down. Who is left as candidate for the European Presidency from the UK? It has to be a politician of prime ministerial status, communautaire, extensively known within the Union, able in diplomatic and subtle negotiation, committed wholly to world trade and the development of global governance institutions yet Europeanist rather than Atlanticist in outlook, with recognised connection to Russia and its interests.
2 hours ago