When advisers to ministers write replies to Parliamentary Questions they have no legal duty to be candid. Within reason they can say what they like. So for them answering written Parliamentary Questions may be no more challenging than playing tennis with the net down.
The trouble with this is that the phrase "advisers to ministers" makes it seem as though these people are all civil servants at the highest, or near-highest, level who are aware of the political nuances of a given situation. My own experience of dealing with the files containing Parliamentary Questions, apart from having to drop everything you're doing to provide an answer yesterday, is that from my junior position I was never aware as to why someone wanted to know! It's only when the answer blows up in the minister's face, as happens from time-to-time, that you become aware that you have been involved in something big. And that then leads, for some people, to them deciding that, whilst the truth may have been told that the whole truth hasn't been revealed -- and a leak to a journalist might be a "good idea".
And no, before you ask, I was never involved in anything remotely like that!
No comments:
Post a Comment