I've read it through and it still reads as English to me but then I havent had any time to sober up yet!
Haddon-Cave criticised QinetiQ for the use of the term "tolerably safe but not ALARP" (p334). He says: "There is no such thing as 'tolerably safe but not ALARP'. Risks are either 'tolerable and ALARP' or intolerable.
But the QinetiQ report which used the words "tolerably safe" did not originally use those words. They appear to have been put into a second version of the report at the request of the IPT.
The claim that the aircraft was "tolerably safe" was then used by
ministers and the MoD press office to insist that it meant there were no problems when there were a number.
I am simply saying that the review ordered by QinetiQ seems likely to get to the bottom of who actually persuaded their engineers to insert words "tolerably safe" into their conclusions.