Robin was, at the time of his death, the leader of the House of Commons. In this post he initiated many far-reaching reforms in the way in which business is done at Westminster. He was an avid supporter of the House of Commons, and of the history of Westminster, and went to great efforts to modernise the work of the institution, often while receiving less than total support from his Parliamentary party.

He was spokesperson for Labour in a number of areas, both in government and opposition, during the course of his distinguished career at Westminster. Many will remember his dignified resignation of his cabinet post at the time of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Previously, of course, he had been Secretary for Foreign Affairs in the first Blair government.

He was one of the cabinet's chief opponents of military action against Iraq, and on St Patrick’s Day, 2003, resigned from the Cabinet, saying that he could not accept “collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support." It is fair to say that, both in resigning on the eve of the invasion and in his conduct that followed he restored a sense of principle, and grace, to a part of the political world that had lost its moral compass.
The logic which he used in that speech was impressive for its lucidity and clearness. The following is a sample of its strength and depth:
"Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralised and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days.
We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.
Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term - namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target.
It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories.
Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?
Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors? "

The line of reasoning which he employed was noteworthy for its foresight. He had seen the same intelligence files as others, but did not believe that this evidence stood up. He was concerned that the evidence of Saddam possessing weapons of mass destruction was flimsy. He worried that Blair was rushing into a campaign in a desperate attempt to show loyalty to the US, without giving heed to the consequences. He warned Blair that by going to war, he would inflame the Middle East, and that a terrible legacy would be created.

Robin Cook was thoroughly vindicated in relation to these matters. Blair’s war in Iraq, his fifth in six years, was one of the great catastrophes of post-second world war British and international politics. If the prime minister had listened more, and disdained less, a man of such formidable intellect, much of the tragedy which has engulfed the Middle East ever since might have been avoided.

The resignation speech which he gave was one of the strongest in modern British political history and was received with an unprecedented show of support by his fellow MPs. According to the obituary in The Economist at the time, this was the only speech ever to receive a standing ovation in the history of the House of Commons.

The decision to resign his post was entirely consistent with the absolute integrity which Robin displayed at all times during his political career. He was a politician of the highest honour, who at all times stood for fairness, accountability and truth.

I had the very good fortune to meet Robin on a number of occasions and on each of those was impressed with his humanity, his humour, and his intellect. The last occasion upon which we met was at the Irish Labour Party’s National Conference in 2004, to which Robin had been invited and at which I had the privilege of introducing him.

The world is a lesser, and sadder place for the loss of intellects and personalities such as Robin Cook. One year on, we mourn, we remember, and hope for more men and women of his moral, intellectual and political strength.
-