I don't see how that is witholding information or debate? The publication of the report when a decision has been made to carry out a FAI or not will allow public scrutiny - which along with any media attention will demand answers to any questions not posed in the SI.
The point is that MoD no longer releases the report for independent scrutiny until
after the Inquest or FAI is complete. Families are required to sign a confidentiality agreement saying they will not reveal contents until then.
That means MoD dictates what is revealed in Court, what evidence is heard and what direction the Inquest/FAI takes. The reason for this change of policy is clear. MoD are upset over being caught lying in the past so don't want those who know the truth, or who can do a better job of uncovering the truth, having their say. This militates against the mutual aim of the SI and Inquest/FAI - to prevent recurrence.
The Red Arrows case is a prime example. MoD's claim that they were not told of the servicing instructions in the early 90s has never been put to the test. The family was in no position to challenge because they had no access to specialists who would know the questions to ask. No challenge is taken as acceptance of the truth, which is not the case.
Once the verdict is reported, the media is not interested. MoD, at most, take a minor hit and the issue is compartmentalised instead of being seen for what it is - part of the wider systemic failings MoD seeks to conceal.