The security services should be given an official spokesman, a senior MP has recommended.

In an interview with ePolitix.com Andrew Mackinlay, a member of the foreign affairs committee, argued that such a move would prevent a repeat of the row over the Iraq crisis.

At the height of the row, senior member of the Cabinet John Reid criticised "rogue elements" in the intelligence services for briefing against the government.

The Labour MP renewed his criticism of the fact that the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, the official name of MI6, had briefed the BBC during the Iraq crisis and called for the creation of an official spokesman.

"These people who talk to journalists - there's no harm in that - they won't talk to MPs and that's a constitutional issue in my view," he said.

"I have raised this whole issue of who's authorised to speak, how, when, where and on what terms. There should be proper, accountable, accredited people to talk."

Mackinlay, who has been a strong critic of ministers, called for the government to overhaul the laws governing the security services which he believed are now outdated.

He claimed the row over Iraq had highlighted the problems with the legislation relating to the British intelligence organisations.

"The Official Secrets Act needs to be repealed and a new act created that's more appropriate to EU human rights legislation. The current rules date back to the Kaiser - that's long before September 11," he said.

Mackinlay said the authority of the joint Lords and Commons intelligence and security committee was undermined because it was not fully independent.

Although MPs and peers can scrutinise the work of organisations such as the Secret Intelligence Service and GCHQ, the committee is too closely linked to the prime minister, the MP claimed.

"There is no parliamentary oversight. It's a serious flaw in our processes. Most democracies pride themselves at having independent committees overseeing their intelligence services. We don't have it," he said.

He slammed the culture of secrecy that surrounds the way the committee operates.

"I think it's a nonsense committee in many respects. When they meet it's in secret and they go off in a white van," he said.

"In their last report, if you look in the glossary of terms it says 'the CIA means Central Intelligence Agency' and then further down it's got dot, dot, dot means dot, dot, dot. It's just absurd."

Mackinlay warned that its findings into the Iraq dossier are unlikely to silence the critics.

"It's a great pity for them that when their report is produced it will not be acceptable to you and I because it hasn't been done in a way that's right," he said.

Mackinlay said the row over the dossier and the involvement of Downing Street communications chief Alastair Campbell had become a test of the government's commitment to open government.

"It is a matter of fact that at first they said no but I think Number 10 felt it was better Campbell appeared rather than didn't appear," he said.

"If they were to be relaxed about things it actually would be to their credit more and actually make for good governance. It would reinforce their radical, democratic credentials which do need promoting."

He also rejected criticism that the foreign affairs committee had acted on party lines when issuing its recent report.

"When you go into select committee you act in a semi-judicial way. You should apply yourself without fear or favour, without showing partial affection," he said.