Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
copied to me. I would also intend, diaries permitting, to join any meeting which
Min(DP) intends to hold on this topic.”
315.  In his witness statement ACM Bagnall told the Inquiry that Mr Hoon had asked
Lord Bach:
“ … to be his lead Minister for UORs and for DCDS(EC) to act as Senior
Responsible Owner (SRO) for UORs. This led to regular and increasingly frequent
meetings between the then Minister and his staffs and the then DCDS(EC) and his
experts. For my part I monitored the UOR process on CDS’ behalf and intervened if
and when required.”152
316.  Lord Bach told the Inquiry:
“I was asked by the Secretary of State, in the second half of January 2003, to take
temporary responsibility for UORs. This involved being briefed by DCDS(EC) [AM
Stirrup] in writing, before chairing (for the most part) weekly meetings with senior
officials in order to look at progress of UORs that had already been agreed between
MOD and HMT. I played no part in determining what UORs should or should not be
proceeded with. Those decisions were taken at a stage well before their progress
was looked at by the Committee I chaired. I had played no role before the request in
Jan 2003, nor should I have. UORs were not the responsibility of Min DP: they and
the Defence Logistics Organisation were in the portfolio of Min AF [Mr Ingram].”153
317.  Following his statement to the House of Lords on 20 January, Lord Bach was
advised on 22 January by Mr Williams that there was “not only no need for him to clarify
the statement made earlier this week about ‘desertisation’ but actual disadvantage in
seeking to do so”.154
318.  Mr Williams confirmed that only one, “relatively minor”, modification would be
completed before the vehicles deployed. He stated:
“On that basis, if by ‘deployed’ the Minister meant the formal point at which units
begin to leave their main bases and embark for the Gulf, then his statement on
Monday would be misleading. I suspect, however, that Lord Bach meant the point
at which UK forces were likely to become engaged on offensive operations. Given
the context of the question and the fact that many Lords/MPs would not pick up on
the formal military interpretation of the term ‘deployed’, that is probably a reasonable
position to take. If that is the case, I do not judge that a public clarification of the use
of the word ‘deployed’ is either necessary or would add much value.”
152  Statement, 6 January 2011, page 3.
153  Statement, 22 December 2010, page 1.
154  Minute Williams to PS/Minister(DP), 22 January 2003, ‘Op TELIC – Challenge 2 ‘Desertisation’
UOR Activity’.
48
Previous page | Contents | Next page