THE BRITISH Labour Party insisted yesterday the government had been "discredited" by their one vote victory in the Scott report debate and warned that the public would deliver its verdict on ministers' actions at the general election.
Although Labour admitted the result was "disappointing", its leader, Mr Tony Blair, stressed that the government had been very considerable discredited" by the debate.
"They got trounced in the argument. Nobody can seriously trust them when they set up an inquiry. It takes three years. They spend millions of pounds. They say it will establish the truth. But once it finds the truth they then attempt to walk away from its findings."
During a placid Prime Minister's Question Time, Labour MPs waved their order papers at Mr Major, shouting bye, bye. To laughter and applause, one Labour backbencher, Mr Bill Michie, suggested the government had survived because the ministers, criticised by Scott, had "voted to exonerate themselves".
Mr Major replied by pointing out that five Law Lords had "unequivocally" supported the actions of the Attorney General, Sir Nicholas Lyell. "On that basis, I still look forward to Robin Cook [the shadow Foreign Secretary] withdrawing the remarks he has repeatedly made in the last three years. Until he does so we will not be able to take seriously a single word he utters.
Although the government won by the narrowest of margins, the result ensured that ministers will not have to resign over their actions in the arms to Iraq affair. Just two Tory backbenchers voted against the government, and victory was secured only because the three Democratic Unionist MPs decided to abstain.
One Tory backbencher, Mr Rupert Allason, had repeatedly threatened to rebel, but eventually decided to vote with the government after extracting concessions on the use of Public Interest Immunity certificates in future trials.
However, Mr Quentin Davis, one of the Tory rebels, said he still believed ministers had misled parliament and so had "no alternative" but to vote against the government.
"I thought we could not possibly accept that and be seen to accept that without doing damage to the integrity of parliament and to the standards that ministers are expected to live up to, in the future. The government simply didn't address that point. They simply evaded that point so I had no alternative but to vote against them," he explained.