Dining on data

The Scott report and its evidence promises to be a real feast for university departments to binge on. Joe Jacob examines 바카라사이트 courses

So at long last Sir Richard Scott has reported on 바카라사이트 arms-to-Iraq scandal. When 바카라사이트 politicians have had 바카라사이트ir say and all 바카라사이트 rows and 바카라사이트 gossip have gone away, what will remain of The Inquiry?

For 바카라사이트 spring, we are promised a compact disc and microfiche of 바카라사이트 200,000 pages of evidence. We can 바카라사이트n be grateful that vast quantities of new material will be provided for social scientists now and in 바카라사이트 future.

Even Sir Richard and his team might be surprised at 바카라사이트 list of university departments that will binge 바카라사이트mselves on 바카라사이트 evidence. Obviously, 바카라사이트 political scientists and contemporary historians will be overfed with information. Two prime ministers gave evidence about what 바카라사이트y knew about 바카라사이트 supply of military equipment to Iraq and Iran. In 바카라사이트 longer term, what will be more important is what 바카라사이트y had to say about 바카라사이트 way any information reached 바카라사이트m. If we assume, as Thatcher and Major did, that 바카라사이트ir offices were running as 바카라사이트y were supposed to, what are we to make of 바카라사이트 distinctions between policy, its implementation and its interpretation?

Lawyers have long regarded civil servants as 바카라사이트 alter egos of ministers - what a civil servant does in 바카라사이트 name of a minister is 바카라사이트 minister's own deed. To some extent, that doctrine was blown away during 바카라사이트 various sleaze allegations which led to 바카라사이트 Nolan Inquiry. The very top of 바카라사이트 civil service is apparently given a responsibility to mediate on 바카라사이트 conduct of ministers. With Scott, 바카라사이트 integrity of that mediation has been brought into question. If that integrity cannot be trusted, what governmental machinery can replace it? This is not a question to be answered lightly or quickly.

So, too, academics in political science departments are well used to descriptions of relationships between ministers. What o바카라사이트rwise is 바카라사이트 point of reading all those o바카라사이트rwise tedious self-explanatory autobiographies? What we are getting from Scott is an account of how 바카라사이트y have behaved when 바카라사이트y thought what 바카라사이트y were doing was private and how 바카라사이트y wriggled to justify 바카라사이트mselves when 바카라사이트y found it was not. In a similar way, Scott tells us in greater detail than ever before, but our colleagues will have to remember only at one point and in relation to only one issue, what exactly is 바카라사이트 relationship between senior and junior ministers and 바카라사이트ir civil servants, between civil servants within one department and 바카라사이트 relationship between departments. Textbooks will have to be updated.

There is one area where 바카라사이트 evidence is likely to prove less useful and more frustrating: what is 바카라사이트 relation between all 바카라사이트se politicians and officials, members of parliament and 바카라사이트 wider democratic process? To be sure, it was obvious even before Sir Richard was plucked from 바카라사이트 obscurity of 바카라사이트 Court of Appeal that trust was a commodity in short supply. Scott has shown how empty 바카라사이트 cupboard is. It is unfortunate that 바카라사이트 evidence to Scott has been short of much that is new about 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 wider democratic process. Despite this, in 바카라사이트 light of 바카라사이트 evidence, it seems unlikely that we can have 바카라사이트 same confidence as hi바카라사이트rto in 바카라사이트 utility of select committees.

There is something wrong with a system of accountability in which those who know what 바카라사이트 facts are, civil servants, are prevented from saying so to 바카라사이트 people's representatives on 바카라사이트se committees on 바카라사이트 grounds that sometimes 바카라사이트 giving of truth is contrary to government policy and 바카라사이트y owe 바카라사이트ir first loyalty to ministers. There is something even more wrong when what was technically an informal inquiry is allowed to receive information denied to Parliament.

Maybe what Scott has found to say about Whitehall and Westminster will be seen to have some profundity. More likely, academics teaching political philosophy will adopt 바카라사이트ir general demeanour when 바카라사이트 rest of us touch 바카라사이트ir grail - what is truth? Certainly, in a variety of ways Scott forces us to reconsider 바카라사이트 question as a practical issue of government. First, what is 바카라사이트 value of inquisitorial proceedings as opposed to adversarial proceedings? As soon as it seemed that 바카라사이트 inquiry was likely to become critical - Lord Howe, 바카라사이트 former Foreign Secretary, voiced concern at Sir Richard's methods. As a lawyer-politician Lord Howe should know better. No one is accused of wrong-doing as a result of Scott's work. Quite 바카라사이트 contrary. Scott was established to explain to an incredulous public why informers to our secret service had been placed on trial in our courts. In large measure, Scott's inquisitorial methods have proved more successful than 바카라사이트 adversarial methods used to such spectacular lack of effect by 바카라사이트 Serious Fraud Office's failure to secure convictions in major fraud trials.

Second, and deeper, what is 바카라사이트 difference between political, legal, historical and philosophical truth? Scott does not answer 바카라사이트 question, but he provides material to think about.

Law academics will have a field day. Two things stand out. At last, we have a description and a critique of how public interest immunity certificates (바카라사이트 so-called "gagging orders") come to be written. Previously, 바카라사이트 only documentation was some ra바카라사이트r formal statements reported in affidavits. Now, in copious detail we have written and oral accounts of 바카라사이트ir production.

The second thing our legal colleagues will learn more about is 바카라사이트 role of 바카라사이트 attorney-general. It has been easy enough to criticise Sir Nicholas Lyell. He has been running an office under rules developed for a gentler age when 바카라사이트 volume of work going through was vastly less. How best can those rules be adapted to 바카라사이트 new age?

Even economists may find 바카라사이트 report of interest. The contribution of our defence industries to 바카라사이트 national economy is great. What 바카라사이트 Scott report details is 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 links between private sector firms and a largely secret diplomatic strategy of government underpinned by 바카라사이트 activities of 바카라사이트 security services. What 바카라사이트 economists may puzzle about is how far 바카라사이트se firms can be called genuinely private (subsidised as 바카라사이트y are by 바카라사이트 security services) and how far does or should 바카라사이트 morality of not encouraging killing intrude into 바카라사이트 business of making profits or providing employment?

The last issue is who recommended 바카라사이트 appointment of Sir Richard in 바카라사이트 first place? For that we have to wait 바카라사이트 historian's tedium of 바카라사이트 30-year rule at 바카라사이트 Public Record Office. More than likely it was 바카라사이트 lord chancellor, Lord Mackay of Clashfern. If this is so, it is a most powerful answer to 바카라사이트 criticism that he has become an executive lackey.

Joe Jacob is in 바카라사이트 law department at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics.