Benn attack angers anti-war movement
HILARY BENN, the bookies' favourite to win Labour's forthcoming deputy leadership election, has attacked the anti-war movement in an unrepentant defence of his support for the invasion of Iraq.
Mr Benn has won support among Blairites and secured strong backing from the centre and left. Veteran left-winger Dennis Skinner is one of his supporters.
In an interview in this week's Tribune, Mr Benn, the Secretary of State for International Development, says that, unlike many Labour MPs, he does not regret voting to support the Iraq war. "Do I regret voting for the war? No, I do not. Do I wish Saddam Hussein were still in power? No, I do not. I think that is the view of the vast majority of Iraqi people."
Mr Benn, whose father, Tony, is president of the Stop the War Coalition, is sharply critical, of it.
"I respect those who took a different view. But I find it very hard to understand why those voices are not heard more loudly opposing the sectarian butchers and the suicide bombers, and supporting an elected Iraqi Government. You can have opposed the military action, but you can also recognise why you should support the Iraqi Government."
His comments will anger many MPs and trade unionists. Peter Kilfoyle, the Labour MP who moved the amendment in the House of Commons opposing the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 said: "His comments are typical of those who want to rewrite the Iraq war. The war was nothing to do with wanting to get rid of Saddam Hussein. It was about weapons of mass destruction. I don't think it befits a minister dealing with international matters to be promoting illegal regime change. It was the invasion which gave rise to a Pandora's box. This was predicted before the war and this is exactly what happened - creating instability inside and outside Iraq."
Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union, was also critical. "The invasion and occupation of Iraq has been a disaster beyond even what those of us in the anti-war movement imagined. Labour desperately needs a degree of humility from those of its representatives who voted for this catastrophe if we are to move
forward."
A spokesperson for the Stop the War Coalition said: "The Iraqi Government is a puppet government - one that owes its survival purely to the occupation. And it is the occupation which is fuelling the violence in Iraq."

Finally, is it Benn for deputy?
MOST Cabinet ministers, particularly contenders for the deputy leadership of the Labour Party, seem to be permanently surrounded by a phalanx of fawning advisors. So it was a surprise to meet Hilary Benn alone in the lobby of the House of Commons and with a rucksack slung over his shoulder, particularly as he had come direct from a select committee grilling.
He then decided that our conversation should be conducted in an alcove adjoining a busy walkway. While it would have been nice to have had a cup of tea - it would have been nothing stronger, since Benn is teetotal like his father, Tony - I couldn't decide if the impromptu venue showed evidence of disorganisation or supreme
confidence.
Benn's challenge to become deputy leader has added to a crowded field. He once famously described himself as a "Benn not a Bennite" and is regarded as a hardworking, technocratic Secretary of State for International Development and a dependable Blairite, but not from the cadre of ultra-Blairites.
In some ways, he is similar to one of his deputy leadership rivals, Trade and Industry Secretary Alan Johnson. Perhaps partly because of his famous father, Benn has a broad appeal across the Labour Party and has already attracted some left-wing support, including from veteran Bolsover MP Dennis Skinner.
So why does he want to replace John Prescott? "We need a deputy leader who will provide honest advice and leadership. We need a deputy leader who will provide a voice for the party at the highest level of government. We need a deputy leader who is good at working with other people in a team.
"We need the party to move forward, internationally and nationally. I think what is uppermost in people's minds is who is going to give us the chance of winning the next general election. That is partially about reminding people what a difference the Labour Government has made, and partially that there are some big challenges: climate change, international security, keeping the British economy successful. We have got to demonstrate we have the capacity to guide people through them."
One characteristic invariably ascribed to Benn is his innate niceness. This is evident when I attempt to probe him on the qualities that distinguish him from other deputy leadership candidates. He prefers not to reply, insisting: "That is for other people to answer". Instead, he chooses to praise his rivals: "If you look at the field of potential candidates, you have got a lot of ability. I respect Jon Cruddas and the work he has done, particularly in campaigning against the BNP. I respect
Harriet Harman for what she has done in campaigning for childcare. There's Alan Johnson's background in the trade union movement and success in his ministerial jobs, and Peter
Hain's record as a campaigner and what he is doing on the Northern Ireland peace process.
"I think that reflects on the strength of the party. This election is a real opportunity to
have a discussion about the future direction of the party and the country, and then make a choice."
Jon Cruddas has attempted to re-write the job description by arguing that, while Labour's deputy leader should be in the Cabinet, he or she should not become Deputy Prime Minister. The job of deputy leader should be a primarily campaigning one and the post-holder should not have a ministerial portfolio. It is a proposal with which Benn profoundly disagrees. "To be very clear, I am campaigning for the post of deputy leader. I am not campaigning to be chair of the party. It is for the Prime Minister, and I hope and believe that will be Gordon Brown, to take that decision. I want to do a Cabinet job."
One criticism that has been levelled against Benn is that trying to identify his ideological beliefs is as difficult as nailing jelly to a wall. So, to borrow a phrase coined by Tony Blair, what is his irreducible core? "I am Labour through and through. I was born and brought up in this party. I shall die in the party. I believe absolutely passionately in the power of Labour politics to change things. I believe in the power of social justice to do things better, whether that is in the poorest parts of my constituency in Leeds or fighting global poverty.
"I am a great believer in the power of education to change people's lives. It is no accident that the trade union banners of the 19th century said: `Agitate, educate, organise'. Apart from the nurturing of your parents, education is the single biggest most important start in life. It opens a window on the world and gives us confidence and aspiration. I am a passionate supporter of comprehensive reform, because it laid to rest this nonsensical idea that you could label a failure at 11. Rubbish."
If implemented, Hayden Phillips' report on the funding of political parties could break the historic link between Labour and the unions. Before becoming a special advisor to then Education Secretary David Blunkett and then his election as an MP in 1999, Benn worked as a union official for 22 years. He is horrified by threats to the link.
"I am absolutely firmly wedded to the union link. It is part of our character. There is that wonderful phrase in the 1906 manifesto: `The House of Commons is meant to be the people's house, but the people are not there.' The unions and Labour pioneers changed that forever by getting representation. Trade unions are just as important in the workplace today as they ever have been."
Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, a number of senior Labour politicians have conceded that mistakes were made and have withdrawn their support for the war. Benn is emphatically not one of them. "Do I regret voting for the war? No, I do not. Do I wish that Saddam Hussein was still in power? No, I do not. I think that is the view of the vast majority of Iraqi people. I have been to Iraq four times. When you meet politicians who put their lives on the line, it is really quite humbling."
He is also critical of the anti-war movement. "I respect those who took a different view. But I find it very hard too understand why those voices are not heard more loudly opposing the sectarian butchers and the suicide bombers, and supporting an elected Iraqi Government. You can have opposed the military action, but you can also recognise why you should support the Iraqi Government."
While Benn has won plaudits for loyalty, it has been suggested that he takes this to undue extremes on occasion. For instance, last summer it was widely reported that he was one of several Cabinet ministers who were angry that Tony Blair had failed to support an immediate ceasefire in the Lebanon. Yet publicly, he backs his leader's stance to the hilt.
"What the Prime Minister said was, of course we want the fighting to stop. On August 1, we went to the European Union foreign affairs council, where we supported an immediate cessation of hostilities. If that is not a ceasefire, I don't know what is. Also, the PM said we had to do it on the basis of what would work. Subsequently, he was proved right, as you had to get all the parties to sign up to the peace process."
Benn was keen to do this interview to respond to Tribune's criticism of the Government's international development policies, in particular the enthusiasm for helping developing nations to privatise their utilities, especially water. This was initially conducted through Britain's conditionality policy. In effect, it was aid with strings attached. A country had to embrace privatisation in return for British help. To be fair, Benn dropped the policy in the spring of 2005 after sustained pressure. Problems remain, but he wants to put the record straight. "I changed our policy on conditionality. I wasn't dragged kicking and screaming to it by anyone. For me, it is a question of what is the right kind of conditionality. I have never yet met anyone who says: just hand over the money, come what may."
Earlier criticism clearly hurt. I look up from scribbling notes to find the Secretary of State's face just inches from mine. Doubtless his desire is to stress his case, rather than to intimidate. "On privatisation, it is simply not the case that I wake up in the morning and think, what can I  do to privatise the world's water supply. Ninety five per cent of our spending goes on public provision of water."
Yet while Britain may have dispensed with conditionality, the World Bank still demands that countries privatise services in return for aid. If Britain is then asked for further help, Benn takes a laissez faire approach. This is what happened when Sierra Leone, the world's poorest nation, asked for assistance with its privatisation plans.
Benn defends his position: "Where a developing country takes the decision that they want to privatise their water supply, it is not my job to say: `I am your former colonial master and I know better than you.' I don't think that is our place and I hope no one is arguing that."
Further controversy has surrounded the PPIAF branch of the World Bank, which helps developing countries with privatisation programmes and is predominantly funded by Britain. While it has been sharply criticised by some development charities, Benn is a staunch defender. "I don't think it is controversial at all. In Afghanistan, the PPIAF has helped reform the regulatory system relating to mobile telephones. Is that a scandal? No. How do economies develop? One of the things they need is good communication links. With investment come jobs. I think this is a really virtuous circle."
Since Labour came to power, massive sums have been spent on international development. Much of this aid is channelled through multilateral or bilateral agreements or through international agencies and there remains concern that Britain does not always know where or how its money is being spent. Some of the programmes run by the United Nations Population Fund have been particularly contentious. In the past, these have been involved in coercive population control strategies in countries as diverse as Peru, Vietnam and Mexico.
Britain is a major funder of UNFPA, which is currently involved in promoting voluntarism in China as an alternative to the notorious "one child" policy. Its critics describe UNFPA's efforts as ineffectual at best and at worst turning a blind eye to human rights abuses.
Benn rejects these criticisms and is vigorous in his defence of the organisation. "What UNFPA is doing in China is trying to demonstrate to the Chinese that there are ways of controlling the population which don't involve the policies that the Chinese Government has been pursuing. This means giving people access to contraception and choice. I am 100 per cent behind them in doing that."