Examination of Witness (Questions 120-139)
15 JULY 2003
DR DAVID
KELLY
Q120 Richard Ottaway: So, therefore,
you could not have been the central source?
Dr Kelly: Correct.
Q121 Richard Ottaway: When it was
announced that the MoD put out a statement that you had been in
contact with the press, in the penultimate paragraph the MoD says:
"We do not know whether this official is the single source
quoted by Mr Gilligan". Given what you have said today, why
did you allow that statement to be made?
Dr Kelly: Can you repeat the statement,
please?
Q122 Richard Ottaway: "We do
not know whether this official is the single source quoted by
Mr Gilligan".
Dr Kelly: Because I think that
is the MoD's assessment.
Q123 Richard Ottaway: Did you know
that they were going to say that?
Dr Kelly: I did.
Q124 Richard Ottaway: Did you tell
them that that was an incorrect statement?
Dr Kelly: No. The whole reason
why this has come up and the reason why I wrote to my line management
was because I had a concern that because I had met with Andrew
Gilligan in fact I may have contributed to that story. When I
reflected on my interaction with him and realised the balance
between the general conversation and the very specific aspect
we are now discussing today, which was a very, very minor part
of it, I did not see how on earth I could have been the primary
source. I did not see how the authority would emanate from me.
Q125 Richard Ottaway: I share your
analysis, I do not see how you could have been the primary source.
Why did you not complain to the MoD that this was an inaccurate
statement that they were making?
Dr Kelly: Because, as I have just
explained, I did realise that in fact I may have inadvertently,
if you like, contributed to that.
Q126 Richard Ottaway: You reached
the conclusion that you were not the source?
Dr Kelly: I do not believe I am
the source.
Q127 Richard Ottaway: You have just
concurred with me that you could not have been the source.
Dr Kelly: Following the logic
I agree with that, yes.
Q128 Richard Ottaway: In that, the
MoD says they do not know of the source and it was knowingly said
by you.
Dr Kelly: That is the situation.
Q129 Richard Ottaway: Do you think
possibly the MoD knowingly got it wrong?
Dr Kelly: No, I am saying that
the MoD cannot make the categorical statement that you want it
to make based on my information provided to them.
Q130 Richard Ottaway: I have to say
that there seems to be an inconsistency between your two statements.
Would you agree that there is an inconsistency between your belief
that you were not the single source and the MoD's statement?
Dr Kelly: There is an element
of inconsistency there, I have to agree with you.
Q131 Richard Ottaway: In response
to my colleague, David Chidgey, he gave you a quote which appeared
on Newsnight in a programme introduced by Susan Watts.
You have confirmed that you have spoken to Susan Watts. Can I
just take you through the quote again that was read out. You said
you did not recognise it. Could you just concentrate on it. It
is talking about the 45 minute point. It said: "The 45 minute
point was a statement that was made and it got out of all proportion.
They were desperate for information. They were pushing hard for
information that could be released. That was the one that popped
up and it was seized on and it is unfortunate that it was. That
is why there is the argument between the intelligence services
and Number 10, because they picked up on it and once they had
picked up on it you cannot pull back from it, so many people will
say `Well, we are not sure about that' because the word smithing
is actually quite important." There are many people who think
that you were the source of that quote. What is your reaction
to that suggestion?
Dr Kelly: I find it very difficult.
It does not sound like my expression of words. It does not sound
like a quote from me.
Q132 Richard Ottaway: You deny that
those are your words?
Dr Kelly: Yes.
Q133 Richard Ottaway: In a throwaway
line to a question just now you said you did have a view as to
why weapons of mass destruction were not used in 45 minutes. Would
you like to elaborate on that?
Dr Kelly: I did not say I had
a view as to why they were not used in 45 minutes, what I said
was that I had a view as to why weapons were not used during the
conflict.
Q134 Richard Ottaway: What was that?
Dr Kelly: Basically early on in
the war the weather conditions were such that you could not possibly
consider the use of chemical and biological weapons and later
in the conflict command and control had collapsed to such a state
that you still would not be able to use them.
Q135 Richard Ottaway: So they could
not have been deployed in 45 minutes?
Dr Kelly: That is a separate discussion
as to what the 45 minutes means. Basically it would be very difficult
to see how Iraq could deploy in 45 minutes.
Q136 Richard Ottaway: The original
statement was that "deployed within 45 minutes" meant
they could be got up to—I think the word was—the utility
within 45 minutes, which implied some sort of holding camp or
base camp. Do you agree with that?
Dr Kelly: I do not remember that
statement being made, it does not actually make sense to me.
Q137 Richard Ottaway: You are quite
an expert on this. Do you actually think that biological and chemical
weapons could have been deployed within 45 minutes?
Dr Kelly: It depends what you
mean by "deployment".
Q138 Richard Ottaway: From Saddam
Hussein saying "use them" to delivery on the battlefield,
to actually being fired at enemy troops, allied troops?
Dr Kelly: It makes a number of
assumptions, that the weapons were all ready to go in the right
place with whatever system was being used with the right tracking
to attack, and that is very unlikely. We are talking in terms
of Iraq, in terms of what we knew ten years ago, a country which
filled its weapons to use them, it did not maintain a stockpile
of filled weapons, with the exception of mustard gas. It is actually
quite a long and convoluted process to go from having bulk agent
and munitions to actually getting them to the bunker for storage
and then issue them and subsequently deploy them.
Q139 Richard Ottaway: Do you think
on September 24 2002 there were weapons that could be deployed
within 45 minutes?
Dr Kelly: I have no idea whether
there were weapons or not at that time.
| 
