Well, Well, Well !! A 'Leak Inquiry' which has actually produces a result, there's a novelty, or is it just a convenient fudge ?
The Prime Minister has decided, on evidence produced by her chief advisor Mark Sedwill, that the recent leak of information from the National Security Council on the matter of Chinese telecoms company Huawei was down to Gavin Williamson, the then Secretary of State for Defence. Following a meeting with the PM, Mr Williamson was sacked, having refused to resign.
On the one hand, Theresa May, remarkably still the Prime Minister, appears to be certain that Mr Williamson is the guilty party; Williamson has vehemently denied that he had any involvement in the leak and that he has been the victim of a vendetta. It's been said that Mark Sedwill has had a longstanding dislike of Williamson and some of his parliamentary colleagues have also expressed a dislike for him. It seems that his departure from the Cabinet will not produce any great sadness. From Mrs May's perspective, she has achieved a much needed success, rooting out the perpetrator of a leak and acting decisively to rid the government of the offender.
However, Mr Williamson's protestations of innocence may yet result in more trouble for the Prime Minister. Williamson remains a Member of Parliament and seems to have the support of his constituency party. Although the matter of divulging details of discussions in the NSC is a criminal offence, no police investigation has yet been initiated; it seems likely that whatever evidence has been used as the basis of the decision to lay the blame on Mr Williamson, it is largely circumstantial and would not allow for a successful criminal prosecution.
Regardless of the result of the Cabinet Office inquiry and given that the alleged offence is criminal, a police investigation must surely now be established anyway; is not Mr Williamson entitled to a full and vigorous investigation of his alleged offence in order to have an opportunity to prove his innocence ? Of course, having already made a decision and acted upon it, the last thing that Mrs May wants is for anyone to investigate further and potentially prove her to have been wrong, so a police investigation seems unlikely and Mr Williamson will remain in political purgatory.
That this is wholly wrong is obvious. If Mr Williamson is guilty as charged then he should face the full weight of the law; if he is innocent as he claims, he should be allowed to prove this in court. The problem is that discovering that Mr Williamson has been wrongly charged and sentenced in a kangaroo court set up by his enemies would be the final nail in the already battered career of Mrs May.
Unless he can get someone else to admit to being the wrongdoer, Mr Williamson's goose seems to be well and truly cooked.
No comments:
Post a Comment