Officials knew of dodgy Iraq file By Mark Riley and Craig Skehan
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) admitted last night that it knew intelligence on Iraq's nuclear program was questionable shortly before the Prime Minister, John Howard, presented it to Parliament to build a case for war.
The revelation will deepen the damaging controversy about the Government's use of flawed intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities.
The department claims it did not tell Mr Howard or the Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, of information from the American State Department in January that cast doubt on claims that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa.
This follows the extraordinary admission yesterday by Australia's peak intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments (ONA), that it received the same information but had also failed to pass it on to Mr Howard.
The State Department assessment questioned a British dossier, distributed in September last year, that said Iraq had sought uranium from Africa to reconstitute its nuclear program.
Mr Howard cited the now discredited African intelligence in a statement to Parliament on February 4 to support his case against Iraq.
The following day, the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, declined to use the same information in an address to the United Nations Security Council because he saw it as unreliable.
A DFAT spokeswoman told the Herald last night: "Like ONA, DFAT became aware in January 2003 that the State Department was doubtful of claims that Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from Africa."
A senior departmental officer said later that the State Department assessment "did not form part of our advice to the minister [Mr Downer]. We did not specifically brief the minister". He said there were no indications of anyone in the minister's office having been informed.
A spokesman for Mr Downer said last night that he could give an "absolute answer" that the minister had not been informed, but would have to make further checks to determine whether any of his staff were told.
The developments follow a significant shift in the White House's line yesterday, with the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, saying the US had not gone to war because of any fresh evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction but because Washington saw old evidence "in a dramatic new light" after September 11.
It also followed BBC reports that officials "right at the top" of the Blair Government no longer believed any weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq.
Mr Howard played down the significance of the ONA's failure to inform him of the State Department advice, saying the information was in one line in an annex to an 86-page document and would not have changed his decision to join the war.