Pendle MP, Gordon Prentice, today renewed his call for the Iraq Inquiry to meet in public with closed sessions, as and when necessary, on national security grounds.

The Conservatives are planning to use one of their allocated Opposition Day debates next week to press the Government to have a re-think on the proposed Inquiry’s membership "to make it wider and more diverse" and whether the Inquiry should meet in public.

The Public Administration Select Committee plans to publish a report on the Iraq Inquiry on Friday (19 June) giving its view on the Government’s proposals which were announced by the Prime Minister on Monday.

Speaking from Westminster, the Pendle MP said: "I made my own views very clear in the Commons on Monday. People want and expect the Inquiry to meet in public but with provision to meet in private should the need arise. That is the commonsense approach. They are absolutely against anything that smacks of a cover up."

"I also want the other political parties to help shape the Inquiry."

"An Inquiry cannot be imposed on us without a debate on its terms of reference and membership."

The MP added: "We want the truth. No more, no less."

Note to Editors: The following exchange took place in the Commons on Monday during the PM’s Statement on the Iraq Inquiry. The Franks Inquiry was established to look into the Falklands War. It met in secret.Mr.

Gordon Prentice (Pendle) (Lab): Franks was 25 years ago, and the whole climate of opinion has changed since that secret inquiry. I want the Prime Minister to understand that. I had hoped for a new politics of openness after last week. I am not prepared to accept a secret inquiry into Iraq, and I want the Prime Minister to think again.

May I ask the Prime Minister this? After everything that he has been saying, why on earth did he not consult the official Opposition, the Liberal Democrats and the other political parties on the inquiry’s terms of reference, its membership and how long it would take? Why did he take it upon himself again to tell the House what was in its best interests?

The Prime Minister: The Cabinet Secretary did discuss with the official Opposition and the Liberal party issues relating to this inquiry, so my hon. Friend is wrong on his final point. As far as the wisdom of how we do this inquiry is concerned, let us remember that there are issues of national security, issues related to our military, serving officers who may wish to give evidence and people who are working in other arenas at the moment. I do not think that any person who looked at this in detail would say that all these people should give their evidence to the inquiry in public; I think that that person would respect the fact that a degree of confidentiality is necessary. They would also understand, on reflection, that if people are going to be frank with the inquiry about the lessons to be learned, those people will want to be able to give their evidence in private. Just look at the alternative. The alternative would mean a long inquiry, lasting years, in which everybody would be represented by a lawyer rather than by themselves. That is not the way to learn the best lessons from this conflict.