Not being 'plugged in' anymore to those that are 'in the know', a Defence Committee report isnt a bad place to start looking for information.
Archimedes helpfully pointed out that the three annexes listed may contain biased inaccurate views. I was making the point that I did not only look at those views but the overall evidence within the report.
It is a good idea to look at both sides of any argument and that is why I read the report, which I assume has done just that. If it hasnt looked at more than one side of an argument then its conclusions are inconclusive.
The argument in this case was the loss of Harrier; that issue the committee commented on. They gave no conclusion there on Tornado.
The report assessed whether it was possible to reinstate the Harrier into service and took evidence for and against that option. The report concluded that the Harrier had passed the point of no return.
The report or an associated document also raised the issue of whether the government at that time had provided sufficient funds to achieve what it said it wanted to achieve strategically. The Committee looking into reinstating Harrier does not automatically mean they considered scrapping Tornado. They are looking at the loss of Harrier within the strategic goals given at that time.
The committee specifically looked at removal of Harrier. They give no hint of support to the decision to remove Harrier. They did consider the option of reinstating it.
Considering all these points in context with each other, the Committee expressing regret in this context could also be diplomatic 'speak' for saying they did not agree with removing Harrier given the strategic objectives of that time (that doesnt mean they are saying that all Tornado's should have been scrapped instead).
I mentioned in my comments that I dont have the answer to this issue ("I would like to know the 'ins and outs' of this case, but that is another thread."). I am inclined to agree with the sentiments of Timelord; another thread would probably quickly descend into a raging volcano.
My thanks to everyone who gave useful insight in this thread.
orca has answered the question of this thread quite clearly. I am happy with that.