The Justice Secretary Mr Jack Straw will veto the release of minutes taken during key Cabinet meetings during the run-up to Britain's involvement in the war.

"He said he would use a clause in the Freedom of Information Act to block the release of details of meetings in which the war's legality was discussed.
Releasing the papers would do "serious damage" to cabinet government, he said, and outweighed public interest needs."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7907991.stm

Serious damage to government outweighs our right to know? Sounds like someone is trying to hide some embarrasing details, like "The release of the cabinet minutes would have reopened controversy over then attorney general Lord Goldsmith's legal advice on the war.

"On the eve of war, 17 March, Lord Goldsmith's opinion unequivocally saying military action was legal was presented to cabinet, MPs and the military and published.
But after long-running reports that he had changed his mind as the planned invasion approached, his initial lengthy advice given to Mr Blair on 7 March was leaked and then published in 2005.
This advice raised a number of questions and concerns about the possible legality of military action against Iraq without a second UN resolution and was never shown to the cabinet."

It all makes me wonder about something our beloved government once said when we had a problem with out freedoms and privacies being eroded; "You have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide".
O rly?