The intimate discussions about Iraq around the Cabinet table in the weeks leading up to the invasion in March 2003 must be made public, the Information Commissioner told the Government yesterday. It would be the first disclosure of Cabinet minutes recent enough for some members still to be serving in the Cabinet.

In a ruling that the Government is expected to fight to the High Court, the commissioner, Richard Thomas, decided that the Cabinet meetings should not be exempt under his interpretation of the Freedom of Information Act because of the “gravity and controversial nature” of the ministerial discussions.

If the Government loses appeals in the Information Tribunal and High Court it can impose a ministerial veto on the release of the minutes. There is no power to oppose such a veto.

Mr Thomas said that the Cabinet meetings took place between March 7 and March 17, 2003. The Cabinet Office confirmed that there had been two Cabinet meetings in this period and both are believed to have been attended by Lord Goldsmith, QC, then the Attorney-General.

Expert View

No Government likes to have its inner thoughts broadcast to the outside world, especially when the subject matter is Iraq

Michael Evans, Defence Editor of The Times

• More

• Post a comment

Related Links

• The result, not the decision-making, counts

• Briton held in Iraq put on TV

Multimedia

• Red Box: Downing Street won't release minutes

The Cabinet Office has resisted the moves to disclose the contents of the meetings on the ground that “specific harm” would be caused. The Cabinet Office also argued that disclosures of what ministers said would undermine decision-making at the highest level and damage the principle of collective Cabinet responsibility for important and sensitive policy issues.

The ruling is likely to stoke anger among some MPs towards the Act. Government ministers inserted a ban on the release of documents related to the “formulation of policy”. Many MPs believe that the Act goes too far. It narrowly survived attempts to water it down by some ministers last year.

The interpretation by Mr Thomas of the Act, and in particular Section 35, which lists areas of government that are supposed to be exempt, places Downing Street in an embarrassing position. Having brought in the Act to make government more transparent, it is now having to fight to keep secret its most sensitive decisions.

Only nine days ago the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was forced to publish an early draft document on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, drawn up by John Williams, who was press secretary to Jack Straw when he was Foreign Secretary, after an order from Mr Thomas to make public the Williams dossier.

Yesterday, faced by a more serious and potentially more embarrassing dilemma, the Cabinet Office said that it was considering the commissioner’s judgment. “The requirements of openness and transparency must be balanced against the proper and effective functioning of government,” a spokesman said. “At the very heart of that is the constitutional convention of collective Cabinet responsibility.”

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: “Labour’s wall of secrecy over the Iraq war is gradually being dismantled brick by brick.”

In his judgment, Mr Thomas said that the public interest outweighed the arguments for exemption, although he accepted that certain references in the Cabinet minutes might have a detrimental effect on international relations if made public. These references, he said, could be redacted from the minutes.

Mr Thomas said: “A decision on whether to take military action against another country is so important that accountability . . . is paramount . . . the process by which the Government reached its decision adds to the public interest in maximum transparency.”

Times Recommends

• Olympic-size television coming to your town
• Mosley opens new front in battle for privacy
• Decorator fined for smoking in van