Examination of Witness (Questions 160-179)
15 JULY 2003
DR DAVID
KELLY
Q160 Sir John Stanley: If I may say
so, I think you have behaved in a very honourable and proper manner
by going to your departmental line managers in the circumstances
you describe. That does not get away from the key issue, which
is why did you feel it was incumbent upon you to go along with
the request that clearly had been made to you to be thrown to
the wolves, not only to the media but, also, to this Committee?
Dr Kelly: I think that is a line
of questioning you will have to ask the Ministry of Defence. I
am sorry.
Sir John Stanley: I am grateful.
Q161 Chairman: Do you feel any concern
at the way the Ministry of Defence responded after you volunteered
your admission?
Dr Kelly: I accept what has happened.
Q162 Andrew Mackinlay: The feeling
I have, and you might be able to help me with this, was that there
was no serious attempt by the security or intelligence services
or the Ministry of Defence Police to find out Gilligan's source.
Did they come knocking at your door or that of your colleagues,
to your knowledge at all, to discover that?
Dr Kelly: I have no knowledge
of that whatsoever.
Q163 Andrew Mackinlay: Since you
wrote to your superiors in the way you have done, have you met
Geoff Hoon?
Dr Kelly: No.
Q164 Andrew Mackinlay: Any ministers?
Dr Kelly: No.
Mr Pope: Any special advisers?
Q165 Andrew Mackinlay: Any special
advisers?
Dr Kelly: No.
Q166 Andrew Mackinlay: Do you know
of any other inquiries which have gone on in the department to
seek the source—to clarify in addition to you or instead
of you or apart from you? None whatsoever?
Dr Kelly: No.
Q167 Andrew Mackinlay: I reckon you
are chaff; you have been thrown up to divert our probing. Have
you ever felt like a fall-guy? You have been set up, have you
not?
Dr Kelly: That is not a question
I can answer.
Q168 Andrew Mackinlay: But you feel
that?
Dr Kelly: No, not at all. I accept
the process that is going on.
Q169 Chairman: I am sorry. You accept
. . . ?
Dr Kelly: I accept the process
that is happening.
Q170 Mr Hamilton: Dr Kelly, I am
sorry to go back to something that I know you have already answered
or partially answered, but I just want to clarify. My colleague,
Mr Ottaway, did refer to this earlier. I just want to come back
to this question of Alastair Campbell and Mr Gilligan. The MoD
statement states that when Mr Gilligan asked about the role of
Alastair Campbell with regard to the 45 minute issue "he
made no comment and explained that he was not involved in the
process of drawing up the intelligence parts of the dossier"—that
is you, of course. Just for the record, can you tell me absolutely
whether you named or otherwise identified Alastair Campbell or
did you say anything which Mr Gilligan might reasonably have interpreted
as identifying Mr Alastair Campbell as wanting to change the dossier
or "sex it up" in any way or make undue reference to
the 45 minute claim?
Dr Kelly: I cannot recall that.
I find it very difficult to think back to a conversation I had
six weeks ago. I cannot recall but that does not mean to say,
of course, that such a statement was not made but I really cannot
recall it. It does not sound like the sort of thing I would say.
Q171 Sir John Stanley: One final
point on the timetable. What was the date on which you went to
your line managers expressing the concern that Mr Gilligan might
have drawn on his conversation with you?
Dr Kelly: I wrote a letter on
Monday 30 June.
Q172 Sir John Stanley: How do you
explain the reasons for the delay between the letter you wrote
on 30 June and the release of the Ministry of Defence statement
throwing you to the wolves?
Dr Kelly: I cannot explain the
bureaucracy that went on in between. I think it went through the
line management system and went through remarkably quickly.
Q173 Sir John Stanley: Did you get
any impression that the statement was delayed by the Ministry
of Defence in order to ensure that it went out only after our
report was published?
Dr Kelly: I cannot answer that
question. I really do not know.
Q174 Mr Olner: You work for the MoD,
Dr Kelly, but work obviously very closely with the intelligence
and security services. Did you suggest to anyone at all that the
intelligence and security services were unhappy about the September
dossier?
Dr Kelly: Unhappy? I do not think
they were unhappy. I think they had confidence in the information
that was provided in that dossier.
Q175 Mr Olner: So there was no, if
you like, feeling within the security services that this was a
piece of work that had been "sexed-up" and it was going
to be rubbished at the end of the day?
Dr Kelly: I think there were people
who worked extremely hard to achieve that document and the calibre
of the document that was produced.
Q176 Mr Pope: When you met Mr Gilligan
on 27 May did you feel at the time that you were doing anything
untoward, that you were breaching the confidence that is expected
of you within your job?
Dr Kelly: No. I think it has been
agreed by the Ministry of Defence there was no security breach
involved in the interactions I had.
Q177 Mr Pope: Do you think, in your
experience, that there is a widespread culture in the MoD and,
perhaps, in the intelligence and security services of people speaking
in an unofficial capacity to journalists? Certainly the impression
I got from Mr Gilligan was that that was a widespread culture
that journalists would have a number of contacts in the MoD or
in the security services. Is that your experience?
Dr Kelly: It is not my experience
but I think you have to recognise that I have a strange background
in the sense that I operated for ten years internationally interacting
with the international press and was well-known to the press and
had quite a lot of contact. I think I am somewhat unusual in terms
of the people who have an interest in that situation.
Q178 Mr Pope: Finally, were you aware
of any widespread unease about the accuracy of the September dossier,
at the time it was published, amongst people who were involved
in providing information for it?
Dr Kelly: I do not believe there
was any difficulty over the accuracy of that document.
Q179 Chairman: Dr Kelly, Sir John
has properly said that you acted honourably. When you thought
that you might have been the source you wrote a letter volunteering
the fact of your meeting. Given what has subsequently happened,
do you feel used in any way?
Dr Kelly: You have already asked
that question. I accept the process that I have encountered.
Chairman: May I thank you on behalf of
the Committee. You have been most helpful.
| 
