What do the Beast of Bolsover, Mr Dennis Skinner MP, and the leader of Sierra Leone, President Kabbah, have in common? They both came urgently to the defence of the beleaguered Foreign Secretary, Mr Robin Cook, yesterday, the former describing him as a master of the brief, the latter offering him support, if not by name then as a member of the British Government which had helped remove the military junta from, and restore democracy to, the West African country. But was British assistance in breach of a UN resolution which states that no weapons or lethal materials were to be supplied to Sierra Leone? Its information minister said the support and materials provided by the British military consultants, Sandline International, before the overthrow of the junta were essentially non-combative, and that weapons were received only after the liberation of the capital, Freetown.

Sandline disputes this version of the scale and timing of its involvement, while insisting famously that the British authorities knew but chose to do nothing about it.

Putting a democratic government back into power in Sierra Leone is a very good thing to have happened but as Mr Cook and the Prime Minister have been saying, knowingly busting UN sanctions is a deadly serious business. It might not matter too much that most of us could not pinpoint Sierra Leone's location on a world map. But it certainly does matter if the British Government knew about and condoned serious breaches of an international embargo, particularly a Government which, despite its willing trade in arms to

Indonesia, still seeks to make a dubious virtue out of some nebulous notion of probity in foreign affairs. We have no reason to doubt Mr Cook when he insists that the first document he received concerning a breach of the embargo was April 28. But such a form of words is open to different interpretations and it certainly does not mesh with yesterday's allegations about papers concerning Sandline's involvement in Sierra Leone being sent to Mr Cook's private office in early March.

The important point is that, like the Tories before them, New Labour Ministers prefer to hide behind verbal ambiguity than endorse crystal clarity. What was it Mr Blair said about learning the lessons of reacting slowly and being evasive in the Bernie Ecclestone affair? What is also important is what it tells us about the process of government: how much information is passed by officials to Ministers, and on what basis? Are harassed Ministers paying it proper attention and making the proper decisions? These are age-old issues yet we seem no nearer knowing an important truth. In the Commons yesterday Mr Cook handled his grilling well, if in a somewhat subdued way. This is not the first crisis in what has been a Foreign Secretaryship marred by a surfeit of diplomatic rows. He could have done with more support from nearer home, but the presence of only one Cabinet Minister on the Government

benches while he defended himself might well have spoken volumes for his political prospects. Meantime, he should learn never to insert the adjective ethical before the phrase foreign policy.