Skip to main content

BUTLER COMMITTEE CONCLUSIONS ON THE UK GOVERNMENT CLAIM THAT IRAQ SOUGHT URANIUM FROM AFRICA

EDM (Early Day Motion) 1531: tabled on 15 July 2004

Tabled in the 2003-04 session.

This motion has been signed by 19 Members. It has not yet had any amendments submitted.

As this motion is using historical data, we may not have the record of the original ordering, in which case signatories are listed alphabetically.

Motion text

That this House notes the Butler Committee's support for the Government's claims that Iraq sought to procure uranium from Africa; notes that, after stating that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999, the Butler Review's reasons for agreeing that this was to discuss uranium procurement were that (a) uranium is Niger's main export, (b) Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger in the 1980s, (c) Iraq could not access indigenous uranium and (d) due to 'other evidence of Iraq seeking to restart its nuclear programme'; further notes that the Review states elsewhere that 'The JIC cautioned that, on Iraq's nuclear programme: "We have no clear intelligence"; recalls that the Government stated on 12th January, Official Report, column 564W, that it gave no intelligence to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on this issue; questions why GCHQ intelligence on the visit of the Iraqi official to Niger was not given to the IAEA if this was the basis of the claim; questions the relevance of the Butler Committee's reference to intelligence 'from additional sources' on the Niger claim and intelligence that Iraq had procured uranium from the Democratic Republic of Congo, as parliamentary answers state that Niger was the country in question and that the Government is relying on one source from a third country which discussed the information with the IAEA before the latter concluded that the specific Niger allegations were unfounded; further notes that Lord Butler's Committee solicited the IAEA view and then made no comment on it; and concludes that Lord Butler's conclusions on the uranium from Africa issue are not credible.

The first 6 Members who have signed to support the motion are the sponsors. The primary sponsor is generally the person who tabled the motion and has responsibility for it. The date shown is when the Member signed the motion.

In addition to the sponsors, the following Members have signed to support the motion.

There are no withdrawn signatures for this motion.