Previous page | Contents | Next page
2  |  Decision-making within government
79.  Sir David added that when, in crises, time was very short, there was a “tendency”,
if a message was being passed through an Agency, for that Agency to deliver it.49
80.  Asked if the Agencies were being drawn into giving policy advice without necessarily
having the experience fully to occupy that role, Sir David responded that they did
“give more policy advice than in the past”.50 Because of the way the process had
changed they had “found themselves almost being sucked into giving that advice
from time to time”. They had found themselves more in a “policy influencing role,
than was traditional”.
81.  Asked for the perspective from No.10 on whether SIS had oversold what it could
deliver, Sir David Manning told the Inquiry: “I can only say, looking back … that the fact
was the intelligence does feel as though it delivered more than it actually did. I think
quite quickly after the invasion it became clear that some of them felt that too.”51
82.  In relation to Sir Richard Dearlove’s role, Sir David Omand said that:
“SIS were very much in the inner council. They had proved their worth to the Prime
Minister in a number of really very, very valuable pieces of work, not just delivering
intelligence, but … conducting back channel diplomacy, and that, I’m sure weighed
heavily on the Prime Minister’s calculation that, ‘These are people I should be
listening to.’
“… it is quite tempting to comment if you are the confidant of the Prime Minister –
and you can go back to Churchill and his intelligence advisers … to find this in the
role of the then Chief of the SIS in Churchill’s inner council. It is quite tempting to go
over that line and start expressing an opinion on the policy itself. I wasn’t there to
know if that happened … I’m making a more general point.”52
83.  Sir David added:
“I think there were certainly people in the intelligence community, and there are still
some, who believe that something will turn up in Syria, and I am certainly not going
to break my own rules and say categorically that won’t happen. We could all still be
surprised. But there was a sense in which, because of past successes – very, very
considerable successes supporting this government, that SIS overpromised and
underdelivered, and when that became clear that the intelligence was very hard to
find … they really were having to bust a gut to generate the intelligence.
“I think the Butler Committee really uncovered that the tradecraft at that point
wasn’t as good as it should have been for validation… that’s one of the background
49  Private hearing, 24 June 2010, page 46.
50  Private hearing, 24 June 2010, pages 46-47.
51  Private hearing, 24 June 2010, pages 120-121.
52  Public hearing, 20 January 2010, pages 61-62.
281
Previous page | Contents | Next page