Friday, 11 July 2014

Child abuse: Was the Home Office-commissioned "investigator" a member of the Security Services?

On 7th July 2014 the Home Secretary promised "maximum transparency" with respect to investigation of allegations of child abuse.

Mark Sedwill, Permanent Secretary at the Home Office, then proceeded to refuse to disclose to the Home Affairs Select Committee of the House of Commons the identity of the "investigator" who carried out a supposed investigation into missing Home Office files.

Worryingly the Home Affairs Select Committee didn't insist that Sedwill disclose the information.

Was the "investigator" a member of the Security Services?

Did the Home Affairs Select Committee tacitly agree that the public shouldn't be made aware of the answer to that question?

It is obvious that Mark Sedwill's interpretation of "maximum transparency" has little or no credibility.

Was the Sedwill-commissioned "investigation" any more than the Security Services covering up issues it wished to remain hidden?

These and other questions about the arguably willfully feeble Sedwill-commissioned "investigation" won't go away.

These and other aspects of Sedwill's evidence make me think it would be better if Mark Sedwill proved to be Temporary Secretary at the Home Office, rather than Permanent Secretary.

Sedwill's secretive and obstructive approach undermines any supposed credibility that the Home Office has in this serious matter.

No comments:

Post a Comment