remarkable in its ignorance and naivety
I know what you mean. When I read it my immediate thought was, there must be a supplementary paper providing the deeper detail, as the main report is very often abbreviated so much that meaning is lost. No sign of such a supplementary yet but perhaps it is “MoD-Eyes Only”. Or maybe he’s waiting for the MoD to reply, this month.
However, I am reasonably satisfied from statements and correspondence that he actually understood, or came to understand, the importance of this detail as applied to the regulations and the failure to implement them (which was the basic criticism in the Nimrod BoI report). But, like Distant Voice, I am concerned at the factual distortions in the report, and wonder if he simply accepted the advice of his MoD “advisors” who, very clearly, had an agenda - ensure criticism of MoD is contained to a few scapegoats. And the wider Government, including MoD, would have loved the criticism of Mr Walker and the general muddying of waters.
I still think there are quite a few MoD staff, past and present, who are nervous in case this gets to a court, where those named would be mad not to cite higher rulings and precedent.