QUESTION:
You say your appetite for power is not diminished, but will there come a point if weapons of mass destruction aren't found, where you would feel you would have to resign, because advertently or misadvertently you had misled the country? And if I may, just on your own priority of public services, there is a big increase in borrowing, do you think you are going to be able to sustain those public spending plans without either an unacceptable increase in borrowing, or an increase in taxation right up to the election?
PRIME MINISTER:
On the first point, again we have a group of people, the Iraq Survey Group, that have gone in. I can tell you that they are interviewing the scientists and the experts who worked on the Iraqi programme now. And I have said this for the last 2 or 3 months, let them ...
QUESTION:
But nothing has been found.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hang on a minute, they haven't reported yet.
QUESTION:
Well have they found something?
PRIME MINISTER:
Let us wait and see when they come up with their report what the true facts are. I have said all the way through, there has always been something bizarre about the notion that Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction. I mean we had a 12 year history with the UN for a reason. He had them, he used them against his own people. The proposition is that having cleared the inspectors out effectively in 1998, he then set about destroying the weapons, but never told anyone. I have always thought that was a very unlikely hypothesis.
QUESTION:
... people expect an answer.
PRIME MINISTER:
I appreciate that.
QUESTION:
Well can't you give us an answer, OK now, speak, give us the answer.
PRIME MINISTER:
I can only give you an answer if you will allow me to give one. As I have said constantly to you, I believe the intelligence we received is correct. So that is my view, it has been my view all the way through, and I think in relation to finding the actual evidence, well let the Iraq Survey Group do their work. In relation to the economy, first of all I would just point out to you, I think this is important to realise, that in respect of household debt, because there is some stuff in the newspapers about this this morning, it is just worth pointing out, I am not saying there aren't legitimate issues again to raise there, but it is just worth pointing out that as a percentage of household income, that is actually down over the years, not up. But in relation to government debt, government debt has been falling very substantially under this government, I think we have reduced it down from over 43% down to just over 30%, and if you look at the overall state of the British economy, the fundamentals are strong, and they have been strong in part because of the huge changes we have brought about in the way that the British economy is run.
QUESTION:
If you don't mind, Prime Minister, I would like to ask two questions. The first one is that the Israeli media talked lately about an agreement between you and Prime Minister Sharon to open an intelligence channel, a direct one, and actually they named the person who had this channel on that side. And I would like to know what is the purpose of this channel, what is its relation to the intelligence establishment in England, and who is going to head it? And my second question is about this desire to either capture or kill Saddam Hussein. Some people believe that by killing him actually the resistance is going to be stronger, because a lot of Iraqis might not like to resist the occupation, fearing that Saddam Hussein comes back while you and the Americans believe the other way round, that if he is killed or captured then the resistance would vanish. What is your evaluation on that?
PRIME MINISTER:</B.
Well actually I am glad you asked me a question from Al Jazeera, so let me give you my answer. On the intelligence, I don't know anything about the speculation in newspapers about such a thing.
QUESTION:
Inaudible.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know anything about any such speculation about intelligence between the Israeli Services and the British services, so I can't make any more comment about that.
QUESTION:
... the Prime Minister of Israel, and yourself, he said you agreed after dinner with him.
PRIME MINISTER:
All I can say is that that is news to me. In relation to Iraq, let's just be quite clear, and I have been talking to people in Iraq who have been in Iraq right throughout Saddam's rule, people who are now on the governing council, people who are Iraqi citizens and Muslims, and they tell me there is no doubt at all that the vast majority of people in Iraq are delighted that Saddam has gone, that for all the difficulties on security and services and all the rest of it, they are overjoyed that their country has been liberated from the rule of Saddam. And I really think what is important is, particularly with Al Jazeera, you go and talk to some of the ordinary Iraqis and actually ask them, because now they are free to speak about their experiences of life under Saddam, where we have already discovered, what, 115 mass graves, 300,000 missing people, probably the numbers of people Saddam killed - all of them Muslims - run into millions. And that is why, for all the difficulties, people in Iraq are glad that their country has been freed from Saddam. And all I say to you is I think it is just important that you give at least a balanced picture that yes there may be people who are sad if Saddam is killed or if he has lost power, but I suspect they are a tiny percentage of the population, and the most powerful evidence of that comes not from me, or with respect from you, but from people actually living in Iraq.
QUESTION:
Do you think on that point of Saddam Hussein, that the noose is tightening, that you are closer to catching him or to killing him? And when you said in your speech to Congress that you might be wrong on the threat from Iraq, what exactly did you mean there, that the weapons might not be found?
PRIME MINISTER:
First of all, I don't think I did say that I might be wrong on the threat from Iraq, I think what I said was that the link between terrorism and weapons of mass destruction and rogue states and so on, and that is an arguable point I happen to believe, I think I then went on to say that I believe with every fibre of instinct and conviction I am right. So I don't think it was quite an admission that we were wrong in respect of this, and I have got no doubt at all that Iraq had to be dealt with in its own terms. In relation to Saddam, the honest truth is that I know what you know, which is that the two sons have been killed, the bodyguards have been captured and are being interrogated. Does that make it more likely that we can get Saddam? Yes I suppose it does, but I am simply drawing that obvious conclusion from those facts in the way that anyone can. One thing that is for sure however, that for ordinary Iraqi people it is incredibly important, we have noticed right up to the sons' death, which is why we had to publicise it in the way that we did, right up to that point there were still a lot of Iraqis that feared he was going to come back.
QUESTION:
Would you prefer him to be captured or killed?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think that the most important thing is that he ceases to be an obstacle to progress in Iraq. Because let's be clear, a lot of the problems for example on services in Iraq - water and electricity - is a problem sabotaged by former Saddam supporters. It is not to do with the fact we are not trying to do our best to get these services running, and so I think the important thing is that he is removed as an obstacle one way or another.