Secrets and lies: Phase one of the Hutton Inquiry

How the workings of Whitehall and the media machine are being exposed to the world the Whitehall machine and the media were exposed by a quiet judge
Click to follow
Indy Politics

Monday 11 August

TERENCE TAYLOR Former weapons inspector, now president and executive director of the International Institute of Strategic Studies (US)

Spoke to Dr Kelly four days before he died. Said the scientist seemed "normal".

RICHARD HATFIELD Personnel director, Ministry of Defence

He confirmed that Dr Kelly had received media training; media briefings were part of his job and he was the "expert of choice" for government briefings on Iraq issues. Mr Hatfield said there were no guidelines for the naming of civil servants, although the MoD would not "gratuitously" make officials' names public. The guidance for MoD press officers on 8 July instructed them to say "we would not normally volunteer a name", but confirm it if it was put to them.

Mr Hatfield interviewed Dr Kelly on 4 and 7 July after the scientist admitted having met Andrew Gilligan before his BBC report broadcast on 29 May. He also spoke to him by telephone. He insisted that the interviews had been conducted on the basis that Dr Kelly's name would be made public.

He later spoke to Dr Kelly by telephone about the press statement. Mr Hatfield said that "both he and I conducted that conversation on the basis that his name would inevitably come out really quite quickly".

What contradictions have emerged?

Dr Kelly's wife, Janice, said it was a complete surprise to the scientist that his name emerged. She insisted MoD officials had assured her husband that he would not be named.

What new questions arise?

Was Dr Kelly given such assurances? Was he told that he was likely to be named? Was he told the MoD would eventually confirm his identity? What support did the MoD offer to help Dr Kelly ride the storm?

Will the witness be recalled?

Highly likely.

MARTIN HOWARD

Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence, Ministry of Defence

He was the first witness to reveal serious disquiet about the Government's September dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction from within the Defence Intelligence Service. He said there was "a very wide variety of views" about the dossier, but insisted that they focused on how intelligence should be interpreted. He revealed that Dr Kelly had complained of "spin".

JULIAN MILLER. Chief of the Assessment Staff, Cabinet Office

Denied the dossier had been "transformed". But he acknowledged that the intelligence on which the "45 minutes" claim was based did not appear in the dossier until 10 or 11 September because the intelligence was not received until late August.

Tuesday 12 August

ANDREW GILLIGAN Defence and Diplomatic Correspondent BBC Radio 4 Today programme

Admitted for the first time that he was wrong to report that Downing Street had inserted the "45 minutes" claim into the dossier knowing it to be false. He acknowledged that Dr Kelly was the informant for his report that the source of the intelligence was unreliable. He said he and Dr Kelly had agreed on quotes that could be used in the broadcast. A memo from the Today editor, Kevin Marsh, read to the inquiry said the story was a good piece of journalism but marred by "flawed reporting". Mr Gilligan maintained that Dr Kelly had accused Alastair Campbell of "sexing up" the dossier on Iraq. He said he had made notes on his Palm Pilot. He insisted Dr Kelly first mentioned Campbell and had raised the subject of the 45-minute claim.

What contradictions have emerged?

Mr Gilligan's version of events was challenged by Olivia Bosch, a colleague of Dr Kelly. She said the scientist had told her that Mr Gilligan had played a "name game" and suggested that Alastair Campbell had exaggerated the dossier. Dr Kelly replied "maybe", but refused to be drawn on other names.

Ms Bosch told the inquiry that Dr Kelly said Mr Gilligan had no Palm Pilot and was writing notes during their meeting. Dr Kelly's letters and his own testimony before two commons committees challenge the idea that he first raised Mr Campbell's name.

E-mails from Mr Gilligan to the Liberal Democrat MP David Chidgey and other members of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee suggested questions they might put to Dr Kelly. The e-mail to Mr Chidgey also revealed that Dr Kelly had spoken to the Newsnight reporter Susan Watts.

What new questions arise?

Does Mr Gilligan stand by his claim that Dr Kelly first raised the name "Campbell"? Did he try to play a "name game" with the scientist? Did Mr Gilligan take notes during his meeting with Dr Kelly? If so, where are they? Why did Mr Gilligan reveal a BBC colleague's source?

Will the witness be recalled?

Almost certainly.

SUSAN WATTS Science Editor, BBC2 Newsnight

Revealed that Dr Kelly had told her Alastair Campbell was central to inserting the 45- minute claim. She did not follow up the claim, interpreting it as a "gossipy aside". She said she taped a later conversation with Dr Kelly on 30 May, which further corroborated Mr Gilligan's story. Ms Watts said she had come under pressure within the BBC to name her source to boost Mr Gilligan and the BBC in the row with the Government.

Will the witness be recalled?

Unlikely

Wednesday 13 August

GAVIN HEWITT Special correspondent, BBC News

Said Dr Kelly had revealed that spin from No 10 "came into play" in the run-up to the publication of the dossier. He spoke to Dr Kelly on 29 May, the day Mr Gilligan broadcast his claims. He said Dr Kelly had wanted more caveats in the dossier, but said he would not go as far as to say the "45- minute" claim had been inserted by Downing Street.

Will the witness be recalled?

Unlikely.

RICHARD SAMBROOK Director of News, BBC

It emerged he had said that Alastair Campbell had "gone bonkers" in his row with the BBC. He defended Mr Gilligan's reporting.

Will the witness be recalled?

Unlikely

Thursday 14 August

DR BRYAN WELLS Director of Counter Proliferation and Arms Control, Ministry of Defence, and Dr Kelly's line manager

On 1 July, Dr Wells received a letter from Dr Kelly in which he admitted meeting Mr Gilligan, but denied he was the main source of his report. He interviewed Dr Kelly on 4 July with Richard Hatfield, head of personnel at the MoD. Dr Wells said Dr Kelly was warned that a public statement might be issued. He was "read the riot act" but essentially was in the clear.

On 7 July, Dr Wells called Dr Kelly to a second meeting, responding to a letter from John Scarlett asking for "a proper security-style interview". During that interview, Dr Kelly was handed a draft press release revealing an official had met Mr Gilligan. Dr Wells said Dr Kelly approved the release.

At another meeting on 14 July to discuss Dr Kelly's forthcoming evidence in front of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the scientist was handed a formal letter warning him of possible disciplinary action.

What contradictions have emerged?

Dr Kelly's widow claimed that her husband had been told by his line manager that his identity would not be released and said he had not known about the MoD press notice until it had been released.

What new questions arise?

Did Dr Wells warn Dr Kelly that his name was likely to become public? Did he make clear that the MoD planned to confirm the name? Were Dr Kelly's pension or security status raised in the tough "security-style" interview on 7 July? Did he clear the question-and-answer briefing note for the MoD press office which gave clues to the scientist's identity? Did he offer Dr Kelly support to cope with the inevitable mêlée?

Will the witness be recalled?

Highly likely.

PATRICK LAMB Deputy head of the Counter Proliferation Department at the Foreign Office

Told the inquiry Dr Kelly had said he had talked to Mr Gilligan and Ms Watts. Mr Lamb later mentioned the conversation to Martin Howard, deputy chief of defence intelligence, at a party on 17 June.

MARTIN HOWARD Deputy chief of Defence Intelligence, MoD

Told the inquiry he reported his conversation with Partick Lamb to Sir Kevin Tebbit, permanent secretary at the MoD. Sir Kevin asked him to have a conversation with Dr Kelly. That meeting became the first interview with Dr Kelly about the affair on 4 July. Mr Howard took part in the "security-style" interview of Dr Kelly on 7 July and emerged believing that Dr Kelly was the source for Mr Gilligan's report. He wrote to John Scarlett, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee. He said he showed Dr Kelly a draft of the press statement showing that an official had come forward.

What contradictions have emerged?

Olivia Bosch said Dr Kelly told her his pension and security status had been questioned, while the scientist's widow said he had been assured his name would not be released.

What new questions arise?

What did he tell Dr Kelly about his name being released? Did he at any time say Dr Kelly's pension, future employment or security status were under threat?

Will the witness be recalled?

Likely.

JOHN WILLIAMS Director of Communications, Foreign Office

Said rumours that Dr Kelly was Mr Gilligan's source were circulating for weeks. He told the inquiry he had not released Dr Kelly's name on 8 July.

Monday 18 August

PAM TEARE Director of news, MoD

Disclosed that she was responsible for the strategy under which the MoD would not volunteer Dr Kelly's name but would confirm it if it was suggested by a journalist. She also revealed Tom Kelly and Godric Smith, the Prime Minister's official spokesmen, oversaw the wording of the MoD press release that said an official had come forward as Mr Gilligan's source. She insisted the naming strategy was designed to prevent others being unwittingly caught up in the story, but admitted to "a fair amount of traffic" between the MoD and No 10 about the release. She also insisted that the question-and-answer guidance notes to press officers were not designed to give extra clues about Dr Kelly's identity.

JONATHAN POWELL The Prime Minister's Chief of Staff

He wrote in a memo dated 17 September that the dossier "does not demonstrate a threat." His memo said the document "shows [Saddam] has the means, but it does not demonstrate that he has the motive to attack his neighbours, let alone the West.'' Mr Powell told Tony Blair that an official in the MoD had come forward as a possible source for Andrew Gilligan's story. He told how Mr Blair held top-level meetings on 7 and 8 July. He was concerned what Dr Kelly would tell the Foreign Affairs Committee .

Will witness be recalled?

Unlikely.

SIR DAVID MANNING The Prime Minister's former foreign policy adviser

Said Mr Gilligan's report was seen as a direct attack on the Prime Minister's integrity and on John Scarlett. He disclosed details of a meeting between Mr Blair and senior defence officials after Dr Kelly was interviewed by the MoD contact with Mr Gilligan. He said he thought it was "very unlikely" that it would be possible to shield Dr Kelly's name.

Will the witness be recalled?

Unlikely.

Tuesday 19 August

ALASTAIR CAMPBELL The Prime Minister's director of communications and strategy

Denied responsibility for leaking Dr Kelly's name and rejected claims that he inserted the "45-minute" claim into the September dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. He insisted that intelligence chiefs were not unhappy about the contents of the dossier.

What contradictions have emerged?

Godric Smith, one of the Prime Minister's official spokesmen, said that Mr Campbell proposed leaking the fact that an official had come forward to a single national newspaper on 7 July, before the MoD issued a press release. Mr Smith advised against it, but the next day The Times reported that the source was a Foreign Office official outside the intelligence agencies. Documents also revealed Mr Campbell's role in drawing up the Iraq dossier, showing he requested 15 changes to the document, including one relating to the "45-minute" claim.

What new questions arise?

Did Mr Campbell leak details of the official who had come forward to The Times? What was the aim of his proposed 15 changes to the dossier? Do they justify Andrew Gilligan's report that he tried to "sex up" the document.

Will the witness be recalled?

Highly likely.

Comments