Charles Kennedy: Mr Blair misled us - and now he is looking silly

I have avoided accusations of 'lying' but it is surely as bad that he drove us to an unnecessary war

I met too many brave and dignified widows last October. The occasion was the memorial service at St Paul's Cathedral, London, for the troops who died in Iraq. It was moving and emotional. As I talked to the families of those who had been killed, I found that some were angry and others disillusioned, while many seemed simply hurt and bewildered. As a politician, I was fiercely aware that we had let them down. Tony Blair kept his distance.

There can be no greater test of a Prime Minister than his leadership in time of war. He is, in effect, playing God - making life and death decisions about British soldiers as well as enemy combatants and civilians. Tony Blair persuaded a reluctant Parliament that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which were a "current and serious" threat to our national security. So far, 58 British troops have died in Iraq, but no chemical or biological weapons have been found.

I believe the Prime Minister made a disastrous error of judgment over Iraq and last week's ICM poll showed that 48 per cent of the population believe he lied. This is enormously damaging both to his integrity and the trust we should have in the office.

Lord Hutton was asked to examine the narrow circumstances of David Kelly's death. I hope the Kelly family will find some comfort in his words. The distinguished judge may censure and blame certain people for the way they treated Dr Kelly. But it's highly unlikely he will deal with the most important question of all. He won't tell us why Mr Blair took us to war on a false premise - saying there were weapons of mass destruction ready to be launched in 45 minutes, when none have been found.

I have avoided bandying about accusations of "lying". Our Prime Minister is the elected servant of the people and his behaviour reflects on all of us. We do great damage to our democracy and to our international reputation when we use such words lightly. I also believe it distracts from a matter of equal importance, the question of the Prime Minister's judgement.

Of course, were it to be proved that the Prime Minister knew this 45-minute claim was false, but went ahead in making his case to the nation, he would certainly have to resign. But it is surely equally damaging that, convinced as he was of the scale of Saddam's arsenal and the threat he posed, without the hard facts to back up the case, Tony Blair drove us into an unnecessary war.

As it happens, I believe the Prime Minister was sincere. I have known him for 20 years and he made his case with passion. But - with all his forensic barrister's skills - how did he fail to ask the critical questions? Why did he allow a single, uncorroborated intelligence claim to achieve such huge prominence? Why did he accept and pass on to the nation only the intelligence which supported his case, while suppressing other key pieces of advice, such as the assessment that a war could create great instability in Iraq, distracting from the wider war on terrorism?

Whether knowingly or not, Tony Blair misled us; his judgement was seriously flawed. Mr Blair clings to his assertions that in the end some evidence will be found by the Iraq Survey Group. This is now starting to make him look silly. Even if some weapons were eventually to turn up, they won't help him. It is quite clear there was no vast, battle-ready arsenal. Tony Blair took us to war on a false prospectus and we cannot, as a nation, let that pass unquestioned.

The Prime Minister acted properly when he moved quickly to set up the Hutton inquiry. He should now do the decent - and long overdue - thing and establish an independent investigation to restore trust in his office.

On that basis, Lord Hutton's report should be the opening curtain and not the last word. But there is a danger that won't happen.

The Conservatives are unintentionally helping to get the Prime Minister off the hook. Michael Howard is pursuing the wrong issue. He suggested in Parliament that the Prime Minister misled journalists in an informal briefing on a plane shortly after David Kelly died. Of course, what happened during that briefing is important, but set alongside the much greater untruth perpetrated by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction it's just a sideshow. And the Conservative leader has already conceded it's unlikely that Lord Hutton will even mention it.

The problem for the Tories is that they can't credibly take on Tony Blair about the real issues because they were his principal cheerleaders for the war. But once the sound and fury of the mud-slinging over the despatch box has died down, there is a danger the nation will be suffering from "inquiry fatigue" and the appetite for knowledge, however incomplete, will have been sated. If that happens, the Government spin doctors will heave a sigh of relief and our democracy will be the poorer for it.

As we edged towards war, my party asked a series of questions. On Wednesday, as leader of the Liberal Democrats, I shall, once again, be putting those questions and I shall seek a proper inquiry. But I'm not holding my breath. I suspect if the PM was confident of the outcome, such an inquiry would be already under way. It's ironic. He's said time and again that history will be his judge, and yet he looks set to deny history the opportunity of getting the whole truth.

The writer is leader of the Liberal Democrat Party