Michael Howard has announced that he is withdrawing the support of the Conservative Party from the Butler Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction.

This follows David Ruffley's letter to constituents last month when the new Inquiry was announced where he said: 'I believe that the Hutton Report was somewhat one-sided and did not seem to fully reflect some important evidence we heard last year at the Inquiry. I fear that the new Inquiry, under Lord Butler, is unlikely to come to conclusions critical of the Government's management of the intelligence services, or the quality of intelligence. I say this because of the 'Establishment' nature of the new committee's composition.'

Mr Howard is withdrawing Conservative support because in recent public statements Lord Butler's Committee has made it clear that it will concentrate more on structures, systems and processes than on the actions of individuals for which there is no justification in the terms of reference.

Michael Howard has written to the Prime Minister giving his reasons in full, a copy of which is attached.

March, 2004

Dear Prime Minister,

I am writing to let you know that I have decided to withdraw the support of the Conservative Party from the Butler Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction.

You will recall that we agreed the terms of reference for the Inquiry and I was satisfied that they provided a basis for a full and proper investigation into all aspects of the gathering, evaluation and use by the Government of intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction up to March, 2003.

It has since become clear, however, that Lord Butler has chosen to interpret his terms of reference in what I regard as an unacceptably restrictive fashion.

My concern arose when, on 12th February, the Butler Review announced that it 'would focus principally on structures, systems and processes rather than on the actions of individuals'. When I met Lord Butler five days later, I expressed my concern at this interpretation. I said that there was no justification in the terms of reference for concentrating more on structures, systems and processes than on the actions of individuals. In my opinion they should be given equal weight. My understanding during the course of our discussion at that meeting was that the Committee accepted this view.

However, the document which they issued on 26th February, which set out the procedures to be adopted by the Review, essentially repeats the statement of 12th February to which I took exception. It repeats, as one of its aims, its reference to structures, systems and processes. It does not include amongst its aims an examination of the acts or omissions of individuals. It makes clear that it will consider such acts or omissions only in the context of its examination of structures, systems and processes. There is no basis in the terms of reference for that view and I consider it a quite unjustifiable restriction on the Committee's approach.

After careful reflection of these matters, I have, therefore, decided with regret to withdraw my co-operation from the Butler Review.

If Michael Mates were to decide to continue to sit on the Review, he would be doing so in his personal capacity and not as a representative of the Conservative Party.

I am copying this letter to Lord Butler and releasing a copy of it to the press.

MICHAEL HOWARD