.The Hutton. report: a whitewash? '\ By Dr Iffat Idris t(./ \)v...{flJ 11'.. D'\ . \\)~\PJ ."" VIRTUALLY everyone sented showed that the MoD understood when seen in wider following the Hutton wanted his name to come out, perspective. and actively facilitated this. Tony For they were made in the con- inquiry into the death of Blair chaired a meeting in which text of a virtual war between the Dr David Kelly reached the 'naming strategy' was agreed. BBC and Downing Street, with the the conclusion (whether Lord Hutton ignored all the former' struggling valiantly to publicly admitted or not) evidence. Quite incredibly, he break the mould of embedded that both the BBC and the found the government guilty of reporting that characterized cov- nothing. Yes, some MoD officials erage of the Iraq War and present government made mis- failed to do as much as they could the true facts, and the latter try- takes that contributed to to warn David Kelly that his ing to silence it. Greg Dyke Ims his suicide. Question: how name had been made public. revealed since his departure (a then could Lord Hutton And yes, perhaps the joint intel- shameful episode) that the BBC deliver a report in which ligence committee was 'subcon- was subjected to a constant bar- sciously' influenced by the gov- rage of 'rants' from Alastair sole blame fell on the ernment's obvious desire to Campbell in Downing Street. BBC? How could he exon- make a case for war, and there- Most of the stories that Campbell erate the government of fore presented intelligence about complained about as untrue any wrongdoing when the Iraqi WMD as stronger than mer. turned out to be very true. Dyke, ited. But other than that, the gov- and the BBC's mistake was to evidence presented in the ernment and the establishment assume that the Gilligan story was inquiry clearly showed it behaved impeccably. an example of the saIp,e thing. W&S culpable? Answer: The degree of leniency shown And again, one should not for- either LOrd Hutton was by Lord Hutton to the govern- get that the crux of Gilligan's ment was' matched in"degree by story was true. Downing Street asleep during the inquiry, the harshness he showed to the did influence the wording of the or his report is a white- BBC. In his report Hutton tore intelligence dossier to make the wash. into the BBC, presenting it as seri- case for WMD much stronger Dr David Kelly's death than that originally pre- in July 2003 took place sented by intelligence against the backdrop Of a Lord Hutton could and sources. There was serious bitter dispute between the disquiet within the intelli- government and the BBC. should have shifted the focus gence community about Kelly was the source of the dossier. And of coUrse, BBC reporter, Andrew back from the small story of there is the utter lack of Gi~ligan's story that any WMD in Iraq. Almost powning Street 'sexed up' whether Gilligan's 6.07am a year of scouring the the September dossier (in country has yielded noth- which the government laid report on the Today pro- ing. What stronger indica- out the intelligence case tion could there be of for Iraqi WMD), and gramme contained errors to intelligence being distort- inserted the notorious '45 ed to make a case for war? minute' claim when it the bigger story ot' how Dyke accused the gov- knew this to be false. Britain ended up going to ernment, anti particularly Gilligan also alleged that Alastair Campbell, of the intelligence communi- war in Iraq. He failed, By focussing on the Gilligan tyhad reservations about story last summer as a the conclusions drawn in focussing on the Gilligan strategy to deflect growing the September dossier. story, and exonerating Tony criticism of the war and Alastair Campbell, growing q~estions about Blair's director of commu- Blair and Alastair Campbell the intelligence thatled to nications, reacted furious- war. Campbell's strategy worked in that his row ly to the BBC's allegations. with resounding words like Soon after Dr Kelly told with the BBC became the his ministry of defence 'integrity', Hutton has mud- main story, in~,tead of the supenorstIlafliesuspect:-afecrthe -waters and bruITed accUraCy ofthe S;Pt~z;nb;r ed he could be the source dossier. Gilligan referred to, this the real issue - of how the Lord H~tton could and became public informa- . . . should have shifted the tion. The MoD down- BlaIr government led Bntam focus back from the small played Dr Kelly's seniority story of whether Gilligan's in an effort to discredit the to war. 6.07 am report on the BBC. He was grilled and - Today prograInme con- publicly humiliated by the tained errors, to the bigger foreign affairs select committee. ously flawed in its journalistic, story of how Britain ended up Kelly faced the very real editing, and control processes. going to war in IrHutton inquiry was eign a:ffalrscommittee. BBC - of'hoW the"81afrgo~eliiitFellt launched to investigate the news director Richard led Britain to war. events surrounding the death of Sambrooke admitted that suffi- Perhaps not, though. The irony Dr David Kelly, and specifically cient care was not taken to check is that the Hutton report is so to examine the culpability of the Gilligan's story. Director- one-sided it has minimal credibil- BBC and/or the government. General Greg Dyke and the ity, and therefore it could actual- Lord Hutton declared that he BBC's governors admitted they ly damage the government. Tony" did not have a remit to examine defended Gilligan's story with- Blair, Alistair Campbell, Geoff the quality of the intelligence out adequately checking' its Hoon, John Scarlett and other that led Britain to war. But he veracity. The BBC made mis- establishment figures might have did have a remit to examine takes. But those errors do not been cleared in the court of Lord Andrew Gilligan and the BBC's justify the whipping it received Hutton, but they are far from allegations, and to examine the at the hands of Lord Hutton. cleared in the court of public role of the MoD and Downing Hutton took the BBC's mis- opinion. The British people are Street in 'outing' David Kelly. takes and inflated them to char- not relying solely on Lord Hutton The evidence presented clearly acterize the whole functioning of to interpret the-facts for them. showed that at least some of the BBC. His damning conclu- They are ca{.>able of reaching Andrew Gilligan's story was sions, and the subsequent gloat- their own conclusions and, as a true, and that both the MoD and ing and sanctimonious admoni- recent poll suggests, many more Downing Street failed to protect tions for corporate reform by of them believe and trust the Kelly's identity. Campbell et al, fly in the face of BBC than the government. The inquiry revealed, for exam- what is so obvious as to be almost The governnient 'won' the bat- ple, that the '45 minute' claim a given. Namely, that no global- tle with the BBC, but it could yet actually referred to battlefield reach news organization - not lose the war. For, despite weapons - not WMD; and it came CNN, not Sky and most definite- Hutton's divorced-from-reality from a single source. Had these ly not Fox - comes even close to conclusions, the fact is that not a points been included in the the objectivity, accuracy and single WMD has been found in dossier, the '45 minutes' would balance of the BBC's news.cover- Iraq. Tony Blair took Britain to I not have suggested anything like age. If you want spin and nation- war on t4e grounds that Iraq's the imminent threat it appeared alist rhetoric you watch Fox: if WMD posed a 'grave and immi- without them. An original