Mick
In short, the reason I can state that I found your article misleading is that when I read it I came to the conclusion that the QinetiQ report must fundamentally contradict the statements that Des B gave to the house some time ago. I think this is exactly what you wanted our readers to conclude.
This is an extremely serious accusation, and if true would suggest he was either lying or trying to hide the fact that the aircraft was in fact not safe. The severity of this inference is no doubt why your editor felt it appropriate to have it on page 2 of your paper this morning.
However, on reading (admittedly only parts of) the report, QinetiQ clearly state that the measures taken, in their view, "mitigate the fuel system risks to acceptable levels".
This provides quite a different spin on the story, and is entirely consistent with what Des said. I can only conclude therefore that the ALARP comments in the same document are being taken out of context deliberately to create a 'story'.