Harry Barnes MP examines the Lancet claim and asks for truth about Iraqi deaths

I don't follow Stalin's dictum that "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." Every death of a human being is an immeasurable loss to all humanity.

I strongly opposed the war, whatever was said about weapons of mass destruction, because I felt that there would be a large number of deaths. The anti-war case was decent and honourable and I can say that the consequences of the invasion included these predictable tragedies. But we must tell the truth about Iraqi deaths.

The Lancet figure of 100,000 civilian deaths is so often used by some anti-war figures that it is commonly accepted as a fact. It isn't. There were serious methodological faults with the Lancet research. They actually suggested that the deaths were in a range of 8,000 to over 200,000 so the 100,000 figure is just an average of an improbable range. The loss of so many lives, on a daily basis, would have been noticeable in hospitals and the whole of society. They could not have been easily absorbed.

The Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister claimed last year, from medical records, that there have been 3,803 civilian deaths in the 6 months up to 5 October. If the same rate applied to earlier deaths, then nearly 13,000 deaths will have occurred since the invasion. But these are from medical records and some burials may have escaped the medical system.

"Iraq Body Count" claims that over the whole period up to 27 November 2004 there were between 14,563 to 16,742 deaths. These seem to me to be the most dependable figures available. They are disastrous enough but only up to 17% or so of the Lancet's favoured figure.

We need the Iraqi interim government and the Coalition to undertake a full count. The causes of death also need to be covered – the Coalition attacks or terrorist activity. The Iraqi Government claims that the latter is dominant.

The anti-war case would still be strong if we accept that the Lancet figure is wide of the mark.

It's bad enough that, say, 20,000 people have died but the use of exaggerated figures shows that some anti-war leaders are more concerned to win points, regardless of truth, than to make an intellectually rigorous assessment.

Likewise, their attempts to rubbish the elections do them no credit either. One can have been strongly opposed to the war and yet recognise that Iraqis have now shown that they wish to take back their country from both the "resistance" and foreign troops. Both motivations were present. And who can blame the Iraqis for wanting what we all want, democracy free from foreign interference, after so many decades of one of the most awful regimes on earth.

And while we're doing some straight talking, let us also remember that the troops are in Iraq under a legitimised mandate from the UN which runs out at the end of this year. So whilst it's understandable to call for troops out now, it does buck international law, which says that the Iraqis should decide on this matter.

None of us who opposed the war likes how we got here but we must face the facts if we are to provide solidarity to Iraqi democrats in their hour of utmost need. My plain message to those on the left who abuse statistics and rubbish Iraqi democracy because they cannot stand the idea that Tony Blair or George Bush get some sort of credibility from them is to get real and do so quickly.

As Bob Dylan put it:

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.