Atlantic Cowboy
I agree. What I said is that it should contain references to other documents, which themselves would form part of the audit trail. Those documents would surely be necessary to ensure the reply was accurate or consistent with the party line? (Two entirely different things). The problem with persisting with a party line in favour of the truth is that, over time, and as postholders change, it breeds inconsistency. The Chinook case drips with such inconsistency, and gets even worse when you take a wider view and study the answers given in other cases. Many of the replies I see are arrant nonsense. On occasion, you even find someone in post who refuses to lie or mislead, putting the cat well and truly among the pigeons. And MoD's position becomes ever more untenable.