Back to warmwell.com website


Extract from one of warmwell's democracy archive pages

Sept 18 2003 ~"the necessary level of security vetting..."

As we reported yesterday, evasive answers continue to cast doubt on whether Mr Campbell was subject to appropriate vetting procedures "Developed Vetting" is required for high level intelligence ( HM Government's statement of vetting policy, as announced to the House on 15 December 1994) but, oddly, no question has yet elicited a clear answer on whether Mr Campbell was ever thus vetted.

Sept 18 ~ "Critics immediately accused Blair of planning an emasculated second parliamentary chamber, packed with his cronies. "

Reuters: Archer out as Blair axes hereditaries
"...During his first term in power, Blair threw out 90 percent of hereditary peers from the Lords, leaving a token number of aristocrats sitting alongside appointed members. He promised a second round of reform to make the chamber more democratically accountable but that has never materialised. In the meantime, the Lords -- who can delay and amend but not throw out government legislation and where Blair has no majority -- has proved a constant thorn in the prime minister's side, forcing him to back down on various controversial policy plans.."

Sept 17 2003 ~ Was Alastair Campbell ever properly vetted? If not "...he was seeing intelligence that he was not cleared to see, including the proceedings of the JIC, which is about as high level as you can possibly get.."

On Sept 2 we reported the Telegraph column "London Spy" that quotes Sir John Keegan, The Daily Telegraph's Defence Editor: ".......It is certainly rumoured that Campbell was never properly vetted. If so, he was seeing intelligence that he was not cleared to see, including the proceedings of the JIC, which is about as high level as you can possibly get."
On the 15th of September, Peter Ainsworth asked the Prime Minister a Parliamentary Question http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/cm030915/text/30915w17.htm#30915w17.html_wqn1 Earlier, in an answer to a PQ by Dr Julian Lewis, Geoff Hoon said: This statement, referred to by Mr Hoon, says, "Individuals employed on government work who have long term, frequent and uncontrolled access to TOP SECRET information or assets, will be submitted to the level of vetting clearance known as Developed Vetting (DV)."
If Mr Campbell had been subject to developed vetting, why should Mr Blair not have said so, rather than dodge the question as he did?