by Owen Temple on 8 July, 2016
The Chilcott Report is full of it, the failure of politicians to challenge the intelligence which misled them into believing that Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction. Apparently the information they were given was partial, omitting key caveats, and swallowed too easily.
I don’t pretend it’s on a par, but the willingness of Durham county councillors to reach for the Weapon of Mass Dismissal against it’s own teaching assistants on the basis of partial information still disturbs me.
So does the fact that I have twice been refused access to the Corporate Management Team’s report(s) which led to the the deployment of DCC’s WMD.
It’s now almost three weeks since I appealed that refusal, and I’m on a countdown till I get DCC’s response because I cannot take this case to the Information Commissioner until I have exhausted DCC’s appeal process (and my own patience).
Is there anyone out there who thinks that in a climate of contrition Durham County will suddenly recognise the importance of challenge, and full information, in the process of reaching sound decisions? That they’ll let me have that report? Probably not.
Is there a lawyer out there who thinks there may be a case against Durham County Council for making a decision to sack all its teaching assistants only to re-engage them on lower pay, this whilst deliberately and consciously suppressing information necessary for a sound decision to be taken? Just possibly. And if there is, I want to find them.1 Comment