Spitoon,
You coments are valid however, the onus is on those investigating the incident, to provide a concise and balanced detail of events including all human factors. The MOD and NATS have a very good system on the whole and you will have seen from some of the Civil Area reports, that they go into quite a lot of detail.
This is not necessarily the case at some terminal airfields both licensed and unlicenced. It is also the case at some airlines. If you look at some of the past UKAB reports you will see that information is at times, sparse with only the controllers/pilots brief reports. Often there is no information other than..."we saw it late, we avoided, it was close". How long had these people been on duty, were they distracted by issues within the cockpit/tower, troubles at home, under pressure from the company, worried about their fuel load, was the R/T busy, was the R/T clear, what was the weather like? ETC ETC.
It is good that the system does not apportion blame, because it then encourages open and honest reporting but the members of the board can only make an assessment based on the evidence presented to them.