Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Hutton: what do you think?

141 replies

OldieMum · 28/01/2004 20:59

I am getting cynical in my old age, but even I didn't expect Hutton to exonerate everyone in the Government for everything they did over the dossier and David Kelly and to blame the BBC for what they did at every stage. What do other people think? And who leaked it to the Sun?

OP posts:
dinosaur · 30/01/2004 16:04

hear hear squirmyworm

aloha · 30/01/2004 16:09

It is undoubtedly true that the gvmt KNEW that their version of the 45min claim (ie the Iraqis 'can' rather than the Iraquis 'may' was 'wrong' - because they changed it from what the intelligence services told them!

aloha · 30/01/2004 16:10

Those rogue winkies are a curse!

Cam · 30/01/2004 19:34

My view is so exactly the same as Aloha's she must be my political twin.

doormat · 30/01/2004 19:39

WHITEWASH

Janh · 30/01/2004 20:24

Gilligan's gone now. Ananova

bossykate · 30/01/2004 20:50

sad, but not surprising in the circs, i suppose.

bossykate · 30/01/2004 20:50

sad, but not surprising in the circs, i suppose.

Quercus · 30/01/2004 21:36

bossykate, my wife is Oakmaiden (see the link?)

Original poster
OldieMum · 30/01/2004 21:56

I've just read this thread after two days stuck in bed with flu. I'm glad it provoked so much discussion. My own take on this is that both the Government and the BBC were open to serious criticism and that it is difficult to see how Hutton could have heard the evidence presented to him without reaching that conclusion. On the BBC side, we don't know whether Gilligan's claim that his source told him the Govt probably knew that the 45-minute claim was wrong was not true. Hutton concluded that this was the case. I think he was probably right, since Gilligan did not make this claim in later broadcasts. However, we now know that the claim referred to battlefield weapons only and we know that Hoon knew this. We also know that the claim was based on information from a single source - and intelligence that is considered reliable is supposed to come from more than one source. So Gilligan was onto something. Scarlett (head of the Joint Intelligence Committee) went along with the changes to the dossier demanded by Campbell and Jonathan Powell. So we now know that the real story was that the heads of the secret services had been sucked into a process in which they information they were relaying was being changed for political purposes.

I think the editors at 'Today' should have used a scripted contribution for such a sensitive piece. Gilligan's e-mail to the Foreign Affairs Committee (which outed Kelly as Susan Watts' source) was despicable. However, I also think that Campbell overreacted, and was probably trying to throw up a smokescreen to divert attention away from the failure to find WMD. The MOD also used Kelly cavalierly and should have, at the least, warned him in good time that his name was out and sent someone along with him to face those Committees. On the 'naming' strategy, I simply don't understand how Blair could be exonerated when he chaired the meeting where this decision was taken

OP posts:
bossykate · 30/01/2004 22:46

hi quercus, yes i know my latin, by i didn't get it - doh!

Philly · 30/01/2004 23:36

This is a fascinating thread and there are some great contributions.For what it is worth it seems to me that Hutton has treated the whole enquiry rather like a litigation case in the courts in that he has felt the need to declare a winner and loser,these situations are simply not like this ,undoubtedly there have been faults on both sides,that is clear from the evidence, and by comming down so decisively on the side of the Government Hutton has effectively undermined his entire report and I suspect done a great deal of damage to the "establishment " that he seems to place so much store by.I have to say that I find his faith in politicians naive to say the least .

I for one believe that the BBC will survive this they are too much a part of life in this country and even those who critisize it would I think be sorry t see it's total demise especially when one looks at the alternative systems of broadcasting around the globe.Like it or hate it surely most people can see how the BBC is envied and respected aroound the world,why is it in this country we can never be proud of things we always have to be doing them down.I am no apologist for the BBC,it infuriates me regularly,I do feel that Gilligan had to go,he made an error of judgement and we all have to take responsibility for our actions but the rest is ridiculous.
The sight of Alastair Campbell and TB braying over their successes was too ghastly ,it has always seened to me that what they disliked most about the BBC was that they felt that as a public broadcaster it should be a vehicle for them to dissapate the Government line ,I believe it should be the exact opposite and frankly at times over the past 7 years it has seemed to be the only opposition this country has had.I agree with the earlier post that the person who really caused this furore was Campbell because of his reaction to Gilligan's report.

Anyway I seem to be rambling,such a huge topic but it is great to see so many people posting and shows that we are not the gullible stooges that TB etc likes to think.

Just as an aside DS1 (10)asked me in the car today what the phrase "power corrupts" means,seems fairly apt in the circumstances today

aloha · 31/01/2004 13:06

Oakmaiden, Gilligan did attribute the claim that the gvmt 'knew' the 45min claim was 'proabably false' in the first 6.07am broadcast. He subsequently amended this in all further broadcasts. He said at all times (except in the first broadcast) that Kelly did not actually say this, but that was what he (Gilligan) understood or inferred from what Kelly did say. Campbell and Bliar say that this was the claim that was widely publicised and wounded them but actually, they did not even mention it in the first THREE letters of complaint they sent to the BBC. They wanted to stop the BBC reporting that they had 'sexed up' he dossiers making the case for war ie ordered changes to the wording which dramatically exaggerated the threat. And I cannot see how anyone can realistically deny that that is precisely what did happen.
If the BBC must apologise for making one tiny mistake by grovelling in the dust and losing some of its best people, then when I am going to hear Bliar and Campbell apologise for taking Britain into war on entirely false information 'by mistake'?

Janh · 31/01/2004 13:13

aloha, have you seen this ?

"Bush concedes there may be a problem"

GeorginaA · 31/01/2004 13:45

There's a very good commentary in The London News Review this week too: Lord Hutton: Fair And Balanced

Enid · 31/01/2004 15:23

Hurray, good, the government were cleared, I feel pleased about it! And I wish the BBC would stop bleating on about it - they screwed up, big deal. Get over it. And I certainly don't believe it is all a big cover-up. And if I was Tony Blair, I'd be bloody pleased too! Everyone hates a winner in this country...

eddm · 31/01/2004 19:18

Simon Hoggart says it all... here

eddm · 31/01/2004 19:21

Or even here this

eddm · 31/01/2004 19:27

Aloha, just caught up with your comment earlier - I wasn't disagreeing with you! In fact I find myself agreeing with pretty much everything you say on Mumsnet, must work harder to form my own opinions

aloha · 31/01/2004 19:30

Enid, are you joking? Do you seriously think the burning sense of injustice many people feel is down to people 'hating a winner'? Really?
Do you not think it is more likely that people have carefully studied the evidence, read the transcripts and emails and cannot understand for the life of them why Hutton does not think the gvmt 'sexed up' the dossier by insisting on changes of wording that changed the meaning entirely? That they think this is wrong and no way to decide to go into a war that will leave many dead? Do you not think it is more likely that some of us fear for the future of independent journalism, a cornerstone of a free and democratic society? That some of us think that passing off a thesis off the internet as intelligence, that using completely wrong information from a single source as a reason to go to war is a bad idea? That we believe that Bliar owes US an apology for his 'mistakes'? That we think Gilligan's story revealed the truth about a government of spin and political pressure on civil servants that is dangerous and immoral?

aloha · 31/01/2004 19:33

I also think that we ALL have been dupes of Campbell. This whole row was engineered to stop anyone looking too closely at the Government's 'mistakes' about why we went to war in the first place. He has succeeded to a degree that I think would amaze even him. He's a wonderful manipulator, I give you that. A terrible person (he loved Robert Maxwell), but a wonderful manipulator.
Eddm, I'm sorry I misunderstood you! I think it was an emotional day. I was on this thread and the Bunglie one and thinking hard about secrecy and lies and what they do to people's lives.

GeorginaA · 31/01/2004 19:37

"This whole row was engineered to stop anyone looking too closely at the Government's 'mistakes' about why we went to war in the first place"

I agree, but I think there's a clear secondary agenda too - it's a very convenient way to further a long standing vendetta against the BBC. I don't think it's surprising that there have been a few calls in parliament recently for the privatisation of the Beeb.

aloha · 31/01/2004 19:59

Georgina, I agree (of course!) Campbell has long hated the BBC.

Janh · 31/01/2004 20:03

I was reading yesterday's Daily Mail at the optician's this afternoon and it had a great piece in defence of the BBC - by Ann Leslie IIRC - and not just an anti-Campbell piece, although that was probably part of the agenda, as she described defending it to M Thatcher who was then threatening to withdraw funding from the World Service.

As the Mail has such a crap website it's probably not linkable to, unfortunately, but the gist was that most of us trust the BBC far more than any govt. I don't often agree with the Mail but I did with this. The BBC would be better shut down completely than privatised.

GeorginaA · 31/01/2004 20:11

Janh - I believe it was quoting a YouGov survey ... hang on I'll see if I can dig it up...

Ah yes, here we go - it was commissioned by the Daily Telegraph and has got widely reported today in various places:

Hutton and the BBC

(it's in .pdf format and you'll need acrobat reader to view it)