For years, a persistent and shadowy allegation has circulated in certain circles: that former Prime Minister Tony Blair once received a conviction for “cottaging” – soliciting sex in a public toilet – and concealed it by using his middle names, Charles Lynton.
But is it truth, or is it rubbish?
This is the central question posed in a formal submission to the Child Abuse Inquiry, dated 11th June 2015, by Dr. Andrew Watt. The document, a copy of which has been obtained, argues that the Inquiry is the “appropriate body” to investigate these “persistent and widespread rumours” and determine if they represent an “important truth or a scurrilous lie.”
The Nature of the Allegation
Dr. Watt describes the rumours as one of the “elephants in the room” – a potentially significant issue that is widely discussed but difficult to pin down. He acknowledges his own attempts to trace the source of the story, which he first heard years ago, led only to a “morass” of unverifiable online claims.
The submission outlines two common versions of the tale. One claims Blair was fined £500 at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court after being caught by police. Another, offered as a “correction” in online forums, suggests a smaller £50 fine, that he did not appear in court, and was allowed to use a “known pseudonym” – a practice compared to that of the convicted paedophile diplomat, Sir Peter Hayman.
Dr. Watt speculates that if any such event occurred, a date in the early 1970s, after Blair left Fettes College but before he attended Oxford, is more plausible than the sometimes-suggested year of 1983.
The Knox Cunningham Connection and Motive
The submission also touches upon a separate but potentially related thread: Blair’s connection to Sir Knox Cunningham, a Northern Ireland politician and old boy of Fettes College. It notes that biographies mention Cunningham visited the school while Blair was a pupil and that rumours suggest Cunningham was part of a homosexual paedophile circle in Northern Ireland, possibly linked to the Kincora scandal.
Dr. Watt is careful to state that the implication of a relationship between Cunningham and the schoolboy Blair is not proven, merely that it exists within the ecosystem of these rumours.
A key point raised is the potential for motive in spreading the story. The author acknowledges that “deep anger” or “hatred” of Blair over his role in the Iraq War could colour the interpretation and dissemination of the allegations. Dr. Watt is explicit about his own view of Blair, whom he considers a “terrorist” under the Terrorism Act 2000 for his actions in Iraq, and details his own unsuccessful attempts to have Blair investigated by the Metropolitan Police and the Chilcot Inquiry.
A Pattern of Protection?
This experience leads to a broader argument within the submission. Dr. Watt suggests that the “perceived protection of Blair by the Police” and official bodies, while not directly related to child abuse, illustrates a pattern of powerful figures being “illegitimately protected.” He posits that this may be an issue of interest to the Child Abuse Inquiry as it examines institutional failings.
A Call for Investigation
The core of Dr. Watt’s request is for the Inquiry to use its powers to resolve the matter once and for all. He states he is willing to make a formal statement to the police team supporting the Inquiry, though he notes his role is primarily that of a “researcher” on the cottaging claim. He offers extensive documentation on what he sees as the wider protection of Blair by authorities.
The submission concludes by urging the Inquiry to acknowledge his letter and “carefully consider whether it ought to investigate this matter.”
The ball, therefore, was placed firmly in the court of the official inquiry. The allegations against Tony Blair remain unproven and within the realm of rumour. However, this formal submission elevates them from online speculation to the subject of a direct, on-the-record request for an official investigation, framing them as a lingering historical question that only a powerful statutory inquiry may be able to answer.
