Anotherthing, just to clarify.
I am not a conspiracy theorist nor do I have any axes to grind with NATS. My observation was raised at two specific comments. Firstly, your observations regarding "Restricted reports and Official Secrets Act". A report which examines and comments upon flight safety issues should not be restricted and I'm having some difficulty in understanding how any element would be covered by the Act. Secondly, a previous comment where someone suggested something along the lines that this discussion should be continued on the NATS part of the forum.
I don't know why Andrew chose to do what he did; he's not the first nor will be the last. Surely a far more interesting discussion would be about how accurate the report was and the subsequent action that NATS has/is taking to address any concerns. Please tell me why you feel such a report has no place in the public (ie the 49% shareholder) domain.
PS. I don't think I've ever been described as melodramatic. Thanks.
