Comments on: Secrecy suggests a political fix http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=3264 Everything about the Chilcot Inquiry in one place Thu, 9 Sep 2010 11:04:58 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: andrewsimon http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=3264&cpage=1#comment-431 andrewsimon Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:27:45 +0000 http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=3264#comment-431 I can see that there might be an element of a double-edged sword swing here. On one hand those chosen for these positions might be in a position to prevent important information from being properly passed to the Inquiry committee. On the other hand they may have the knowledge to know precisely where very important bodies of evidence have been buried. I can see that there might be an element of a double-edged sword swing here. On one hand those chosen for these positions might be in a position to prevent important information from being properly passed to the Inquiry committee. On the other hand they may have the knowledge to know precisely where very important bodies of evidence have been buried.

]]> By: Brian Jones http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=3264&cpage=1#comment-428 Brian Jones Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:59:33 +0000 http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?p=3264#comment-428 This is important information that inevitably disappoints, and seems to demonstrate that the protocols of/for the inquiry are likely to be a real concern. It flies in the face of Sir John Chilcot's declared determination that the inquiry should be as open and transparent as possible. I wonder if inquiry members were consulted. Indeed how much will get through to them, and how much will be weeded out by the Secretariat? As far as I know a number of parliamentary questions on the inquiry raised some months ago by Andrew Mackinlay remain unanswered. All very worrying. This is important information that inevitably disappoints, and seems to demonstrate that the protocols of/for the inquiry are likely to be a real concern. It flies in the face of Sir John Chilcot’s declared determination that the inquiry should be as open and transparent as possible. I wonder if inquiry members were consulted. Indeed how much will get through to them, and how much will be weeded out by the Secretariat?

As far as I know a number of parliamentary questions on the inquiry raised some months ago by Andrew Mackinlay remain unanswered.

All very worrying.

]]>