Thoughts from Lickey End

Blunkett gets the benefit of the doubt

Sir Alan Budd reports on the 'fast-tracking' of David Blunkett's lover's nanny's visa. I don't normally read the reports in detail, but trust the BBC and major newspapers to give me the information I need. Today I read the actual report, and it made me question whether I can trust the BBC and the press in general, and civil servants in particular.

The report showed an amazing willingness to accept the accounts of senior civil servants that they could not remember what actually happened. This might be accepted and forgiven in one or two cases, but nearly 20 civil servants had the same problem about this particular case, which strains credulity to the limits. Yet Alan Budd seems happy to accept it, pointing out that he has no evidence to the contrary. Well he wouldn't, would he? You can't "prove" that someone does or does not remember something. But you can - surely? - express surprise that no one, absolutely no one, out of all the people involved remembers anything?

What particularly surprised me was the way that he picked and chose the "facts" in a way that aided David Blunkett. Blunkett stated publicly and unambiguously that he did various things which might with hindsight be considered foolish or inappropriate, such as asking civil servants to check out forms. Yet when his ex-lover, Kimberly Quinn, said that she could not recollect these events, Alan Budd takes the view that Blunkett's previously clear memory must be faulty and her hazy lack of recollection must be taken as truth. In every instance, this seemed helpful to Mr Blunkett.

I am particularly disturbed that it seems there is no longer any real expectation of getting to the truth. The "truth" is now simply whatever the government and the civil servants want us to hear. Not so long ago, an investigation of any sort was dreaded by politicians because they knew that civil servants would answer questions honestly. That fear seems to have gone, because these public "servants" now serve the politicians rather than the public. Or perhaps they serve themselves by seeming to help the politicians. Either way, it is unedifying and worrying.

Look around at any dictatorship. In every case the civil service has been subverted and bent to the will of the leader. We're not in a dictatorship yet, but we're laying the groundwork.

posted by Neil @ 1:13 AM