Blair: seeking unions' support

Tony Blair has warned that he will not sit back and allow Saddam Hussein to develop weapons of mass destruction.

In a speech meant to appeal to Labour's heartland supporters, the prime minister insisted that trade unions had been a critical influence on his government and called on them to back his stance on Iraq.

Conceding that it was "right to deal with Saddam through the United Nations", he warned that a response of some kind was essential.

"It is the will of the UN he is flouting. He, not me or George Bush, is in breach of UN Resolutions. If the challenge to us is to work with the UN, we will respond to it," said Blair.

"But if we do so, then the challenge to all in the UN is this: the UN must be the way to resolve the threat from Saddam not avoid it.

"Let it be clear that he must be disarmed. Let it be clear that there can be no more conditions, no more games, no more prevaricating, no more undermining of the UN's authority."

But Labour MPs expressed concern at the prime minister's words. Former defence minister, Peter Kilfoyle, said that Blair and Bush appeared to be blackmailing the UN into backing preordained action.

"Unless he is prepared to acknowledge that any action must be taken through the UN and that you cannot blackmail the UN in the way it appears the [US and UK] are attempting to do," he told this website.

"I would have liked to have heard him say it is subject to UN resolution. What you can't say, in my view, is that we are going to go to the UN and then assume that if the UN doesn't agree with your particular line you've then got 'carte blanche' to go and do your unilateral or bi-lateral action anyway."

"That's unacceptable and I think most of my colleagues would find that unacceptable. You can't expect the UN just to rubberstamp a preordained decision."

The prime minister, however, told a hostile TUC audience that doing nothing was no longer an option - but signalled that parliament would be recalled before war was waged.

"I say to you in all earnestness: if we do not deal with the threat from this international outlaw and his barbaric regime, it may not erupt and engulf us this month or next; perhaps not even this year or the next," he said to silence from the conference hall.

"But it will at some point. And I do not want it on my conscience that we knew the threat, saw it coming and did nothing."

"Let me tell you why I say Saddam Hussein is a threat that has to be dealt with," he added.

"He has twice before started wars of aggression.

"Over one million people died in them. When the weapons inspectors were evicted from Iraq in 1998 there were still enough chemical and biological weapons remaining to devastate the entire Gulf region."

The PM cautioned against a "word fatigue" about chemical and biological weapons and said the lessons of Afghanistan must be learned.

"On September 11 last year, with the world still reeling from the shock of events, it came together to demand action. But suppose I had come last year on the same day as this year - 10 September.

"Suppose I had said to you: there is a terrorist network called Al Qaeda. It operates out of Afghanistan. It has carried out several attacks and we believe it is planning more."

"It has been condemned by the UN in the strongest terms. Unless it is stopped, the threat will grow. And so I want to take action to prevent that."

"Your response and probably that of most people would have been very similar to the response of some of you yesterday on Iraq.

"There would have been few takers for dealing with it and probably none for taking military action of any description."

Blair stressed that Saddam Hussein had nuclear ambitions and would move into a new phase of world aggression if he could.

"Saddam has a nuclear weapons programme too, denied for years, that was only disrupted after inspectors went in to disrupt it. He is in breach of 23 outstanding UN obligations requiring him to admit inspectors and to disarm," said Blair.

The prime minister repeated the claim that the last four years had given Iraq an opportunity to stockpile weapons.

"For years when the weapons inspectors were in Iraq, Saddam lied, concealed, obstructed and harassed them," he said.

"For the last four years there have been no inspections, no monitoring, despite constant pleas and months of negotiating with the UN.

"Given that history, I say to you: to allow him to use the weapons he has or get the weapons he wants, would be an act of gross irresponsibility and we should not countenance it."

But he said that the government understood "the concerns of people" about precipitate military action.

"Military action should only ever be a last resort. On the four major occasions that I have authorised it as prime minister, it has been when no other option remained," he said.

"And let it be clear that should the will of the UN be ignored, action will follow.

"Diplomacy is vital. But when dealing with dictators - and none in the world is worse than Saddam - diplomacy has to be backed by the certain knowledge in the dictator's mind that behind the diplomacy is the possibility of force being used."

The Lib Dems welcomed the prime minister's speech, saying the renewed focus on the UN was a welcome development.

Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: "The prime minister's emphasis that military action is a last resort is to be welcomed, as is his recognition of the need to restart the Middle East peace process.

"The tenor of his remarks seems markedly different from the rhetoric of some of the hawks in the Bush administration. But there is still no credible evidence to support a conclusion that Saddam Hussein has the intent to use weapons of mass destruction against his neighbours or the UK."

Campbell added that Blair "still has to make his case to the British people".

Wallasey MP, Angela Eagle, heard the speech from the Blackpool conference floor. Based on yesterday's hostile Iraq debate the former Home Office minister believed Blair would get a rough ride but in her view his "thoughtful" words saved the day.

"I thought it was a very thoughtful speech and it also reached out to the unions."

"I think it reassured about the terms of what's likely to happen in Iraq, in terms of UN involvement and war being the last resort, which I think congress wanted to hear," she told ePolitix.

"I thought he could well get booed and jeered but he was listened to in good order and had a good reception at the end and I think that showed how well balanced and thoughtful the speech was and how it reached out to the trade unions."