CYNICS have always insisted that, when governments don’t fancy dealing with a political hot potato, they kick it into the long grass by ordering a royal commission or “independent” inquiry.

That certainly fits the experience of the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War which is in danger of pronouncing on ancient history by the time it gets round to issuing its findings.

While much is made of the committee’s independence, Chilcot should have been given a much tighter brief, especially over timing.

The Iraq invasion was launched in 2003, the inquiry followed six years later and now, a further six years on, the chairman waffles on about “significant progress” being made without being able to set a date for his findings to be published.

Chilcot’s defenders insist that the inquiry must take as long as it takes because it is essential to be fair to those likely to be criticised.

Fairness is vital, but there is a huge gulf between, on the one hand, showing individuals criticism of them and asking them to reply within a reasonable period and, on the other, keeping the inquiry dangling on a string.

The longer this inquiry drags on, the more it becomes a self-serving gravy train for high-paid lawyers.

But more important than cost is the disservice done to the families of Britain’s service personnel who fear or suspect that their loved ones were sucked into an illegal conflict on the basis of a false prospectus drawn up by venal politicians.

How can they come to terms with the loss of their military relatives if they remain confused about why they were despatched to Iraq?

The requirement for fairness to those engaged in so-called Maxwellisation — considering and responding to criticism — cannot be at the expense of soldiers’ families getting the answers they need.

Lord Morris of Aberavon, who has demanded parliamentary action to force a publication timetable, is correct to do so.

Politicians who supported the illegal invasion, including David Cameron and Tony Blair, claim to be in favour of the inquiry’s speedy completion, so let them give substance to their words.

That much is owed to the families of the 179 British troops who were killed in Iraq.

It is also owed to the people of Iraq who not only suffered hundreds of thousands of fatalities as the result of the US-British invasion but the breakdown of their state, community relations, vital infrastructure and services because of the iniquities of military occupation.

Jeremy Corbyn’s declaration that, if elected as Labour leader, he would apologise formally on behalf of the party for the Blair government’s decision to join the US in invading Iraq shows an understanding of the urgency of direct speaking.

His charge that Blair took Britain to war through deception ought to be followed by criminal charges as well as condemnation by Chilcot.

The longer that Britain’s political and legal establishment string out the Chilcot inquiry, the more delayed will be a definitive assessment of the disaster that was the occupation of Iraq.

Cameron’s insistence on looking for loopholes to open a new bombing front in Syria shows that, for him and Blair, no lessons have been learned.

As Labour London mayoral hopeful Diane Abbott says, “We’ve seen this movie and we know how it ends. Bombing in Syria will achieve nothing and innocent civilians will suffer.”

The sooner that Parliament instructs Chilcot to pull his finger out and publish his inquiry findings the better.