PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
View Single Post
Old 8th Apr 2007, 09:36
  #2719 (permalink)  
Brian Dixon
A really irritating PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi Pulse1,
much as I hate defending Mr Bliar, he can only go by what he it told in a briefing. In a letter to me from John Reid, dated 17 April 2006, Dr Reid stated:

"Prior to the Labour Government forming in May 1997, I and colleagues believed that there were sufficient grounds to question the finding of the Board of Inquiry. This may well have been because we were not at that stage in possession of the full facts of the case, which were then not so widely known as they are now."
and
"However, after seeing written summaries, and receiving oral briefings, including from the Reviewing Officers, it became clear to us that, given the circumstances, they were correct in their eventual finding."

I wrote back asking Dr Reid what additional information he had been supplied with that made him change his mind. I also asked for copies of any such information and minutes of meetings.

Guess what? I'm still waiting for a reply.

In addition, I still have a request in for 13 further documents requested under the FoIA. I'm currently out of favour with the MoD, having been told in their last letter to me, dated, 18 Oct 2006, "I believe that you will now be aware of the direction that the Secretary of State gave in a written response to Lord O'Neill of Clackmannan that the standard cost compliance test should be made to any future FOI requests that you make."

Seems like I have outstayed my welcome Something to hide, chaps??

With regards my outstanding requests, the MoD have cleverly stated, "We have not been able to trace a copy of this document. If it is subsequently found it will be provided to you." Technically not a refusal, but I doubt the documents will be located sometime soon. Not to worry, we have enough to be getting on with.

The bottom line is, Pulse1, that those elected to office can only go by the briefings given to them by the MoD. One has to ask, therefore, why the MoD refuse to acknowledge information that came to light after the Reviewing Officers interpreted the scant evidence as they did?

My best, as always.
Brian

"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Brian Dixon is offline