How President Blair corrupts EVERYTHING he touches

When Labour came to power in 1997 they inherited a system of government that had evolved over centuries to create one of the most stable and peaceable democracies on Earth. This was not least because of checks and balances of our constitution that prevented abuses of power.

Eight years later, those safeguards are in ruins. And the Prime Minister's treatment of the advice from the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, about the legality of the Iraq war proves just how corrupted our system has become.

We are supposed to have a Prime Minister who is 'first among equals'. We are supposed to have a system in which the Cabinet takes decisions collectively - and if it does not agree with the Prime Minister, then he must change his view or resign.

However, such democratic niceties irritate a Prime Minister who prefers to think of himself as a president. The conventions and institutions that once protected our liberties from an over-mighty head of government have been wrecked, not least because of Mr Blair's knack of corrupting and soiling every pillar of the constitution he encounters.

Cabinet government was the first casualty of his premiership. Ministers were appointed either because they were cronies, or because (like John Prescott) they had a constituency within the party that had to be represented at the top table. Having reached the Cabinet, they were then routinely ignored in meetings that became shorter and shorter.

Mr Blair has preferred to govern using a coterie of unelected advisers - such as his political secretary Baroness Morgan, his Chief of Staff Jonathan Powell and his former Press

Secretary Alastair Campbell. And instead of their discussions being minuted for the record, they are of an informal, 'sofa' nature.

The Cabinet never saw the Attorney General's original advice on Iraq of March 7, 2003. This was either because Mr Blair has such contempt for his colleagues that he felt they had no right to be consulted, or because he feared they might prevent him taking us to war.

Some ministers, notably Robin Cook, behaved honourably when they were by-passed, and resigned. But the vast majority sat tight.

In the age of the professional politician, ministers would rather follow the call of a high salary, further promotion and, in the end, a place in the House of Lords than the call of their conscience.

The reputation of the Attorney General is now in shreds among the very people whose respect for him is crucial: the Bar and the judiciary.

Yet he has, so far, seen no cause to resign over how he was persuaded to change his advice to the Government between March 7, when he said there might be legal considerations affecting our participation in the Iraq war, and March 17, when he said there were none.

When the credibility of the Attorney General is compromised in this way, the whole legal profession is damaged.

The failure to show the original advice to the Cabinet breached the code of ministerial conduct. One of the main enforcers of this code is the head of the permanent civil service, the Cabinet Secretary Sir Andrew Turnbull.

Sir Andrew, like his predecessor Sir Richard (now Lord) Wilson, has presided over a ruinous politicisation of the Civil Service, which has helped end the culture of wise, objective advice that existed not just to help ministers govern properly, but to protect the public from their excesses.

The Civil Service is now of lower calibre than at any time since competitive examination was introduced for entrants to it 150 years ago. Its morale is low. It is no longer an attractive career prospect for many high-grade graduates.

Civil servants are now routinely blamed for decisions that are the responsibility of ministers. Advancement, it is clear, is likely to be obtained only by civil servants who oblige the administration. Sir Andrew seems relaxed about this seismic, and highly damaging, cultural change.

THE BEST example of how a public servant has profited from obedience is, of course, John Scarlett. As head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, he helped the Prime Minister and Mr Campbell 'sex up' the dossier advancing the case for war against Iraq.

He never wavered in his support for them when the dubious quality of this intelligence was exposed. And now we learn that he had also touted 'nuggets' of intelligence to the Iraq Survey Group which he claimed proved Saddam was a genuine threat. His reward for this betrayal of his calling: he has been promoted to head of MI6.

Meanwhile, Britain's once-proud intelligence services enjoy a universal reputation for incompetence and servility to politicians.

As part of his pursuit of presidential power, Mr Blair has nobbled various other important institutions. Parliament, in particular, has suffered profoundly.

News of important government business that would normally have been the subject of a statement in the Commons - where the minister responsible could be questioned on it - is now broken on Radio 4's Today programme, or in a grovelling newspaper.

The House of Lords, whose value as a revising chamber and role in trying to limit the damage done by absurd legislation were crucial, has been emasculated. Hereditary peers with an ethic of public service were all but eliminated. The House was packed with Mr Blair's cronies. Now further reform is planned to remove what remains of resistance to the Blair line.

In the remote event of a Government defeat there, legislation is imposed ruthlessly using the Parliament Acts. We now have, effectively, a single-chamber parliament.

Meanwhile, our non-political institutions have been corrupted. The police, once universally respected for their effectiveness and fairness, have become an instrument of social engineering, with chief constables falling over themselves in sycophancy to the Government.

The fight against crime has taken second place to the implementation of policies on 'inclusiveness' for ethnic minorities and homosexuals. This is not least because ambitious officers know they will not prosper without toeing the New Labour Home Office line.

The BBC, after a rare burst of independence over the death of weapons expert Dr David Kelly, is now far more compliant with the Labour 'project'. Its institutional Leftism is apparent in the daily tone of much of its news and current affairs coverage.

Its political editor is an unashamed Blairite. Once-great newspapers of record are also degraded by their toadying regard for Mr Blair and his philosophy.

AND NOT least of the things sullied by Mr Blair is the honours system: not just in the way peerages have been awarded, but in the shameless manipulation of the system to provide gongs to low-rent celebrities to impress certain elements of the public.

Such is the casualness with which Mr Blair has treated the Queen that even she, as the fount of honour, appears to have no more influence over these matters than over anything else 'her' Government does.

But then the presidential project cannot allow for a rival head of state, so Her Majesty had to be taught her place. The monarchy has been damaged, like every other important institution in Britain, because of Mr Blair's arrogance and disregard for the old checks and balances.

Sadly, the shocking way he behaved over the Attorney General's advice was more than just indicative of his own character flaws. It was the inevitable consequence of the destruction of our constitutional conventions.

If Mr Blair remains in power, his corruption of our great institutions will continue relentlessly. Our liberties will continue to vanish as his power mushrooms.

And the once-proud boast that the British way of government is an example to the world will be merely a sick joke.