UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 24

Re: UFO "Leakiness" - Pope

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 16:43:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 11:49:42 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO "Leakiness" - Pope

>From: Nicholas Redfern <nick_redfern.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 10:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: UFO "Leakiness"


>Two months ago Norman Baker, Lib Dem MP for Lewes, tabled a
>written question in Parliament on the Defence Intelligence Staff
>report on UFOs "Project Condign."

>He wanted to know how much public money was spent on producing
>the report, along with the name of the author, his
>qualifications, to whom the report was circulated and what
>actions were taken on the recommendations.

>The reply he received from Rt Hon Adam Ingram MP revealed that
>the report cost an estimated =A350,000 and was produced by a
>contractor employed by the DIS on a long term contract. The MOD
>refused to name him, citing the Data Protection Act, but said
>the report had been circulated within the DIS and to other
>branches of the MoD and RAF.

>Mr Ingram's reply did not say if a copy of the report - produced
>by the intelligence services - had been sent to the Defence
>Secretariat, or DAS - formerly Sec(AS), and often referred to as
>'the UFO desk' - which the MoD maintains is the single and only
>focus for UFO matters at Whitehall.

So far as I'm aware, DAS didn't get a copy.

>The Defence Secretariat were specifically excluded from the
>distribution list of the intelligence report, despite the fact
>that in 1995-96, when the study was commissioned, they were
>cited by DI55 as "the main customer" for the report's
>conclusions and recommendations. Why was that?

Because there had been what amounted to a fundamental breakdown
in the working relationship between Sec(AS) and DI55, over
handling of the UFO issue. Matters came to a head in 1997. DI55
were pressing ahead with the work that was to lead to the
drawing up of the Condign Report, but DAS were concerned that
such work was inconsistent with the 'we don't investigate UFOs'
line on the subject that they were taking with Parliament, the
media and the public.


>In an email dated 17 December 1999 from DI55 to DIST an
>intelligence officer says:

>"No positive purpose would be served in sending the report to...
>Sec AS [Nick Pope's former branch]...in view of the 'leakiness'
>of Sec AS we would advocate only releasing the report to them on
>request, in order to discourage further discussion."

The 'leakiness' comment results from two Sec(AS) actions, again
dating back to 1997. In a document dated 14 January 1997 they
named the individual who had been contracted to undertake the
work, and copied the document to another MoD division, earning a
thinly-veiled rebuke from the individual concerned. Then on 27
January 1997 they again copied a document relating to this
project to other areas of the Department, and also attached a
DI55 document. To anyone in the Defence Intelligence Staff
(DIS), these are cardinal sins. Details of DIS projects and
copies of DIS documents should only be communicated to a third
party with the prior consent of the DIS.

I hasten to add that I'd left Sec(AS) by then. I'd had a very
good working relationship with the DIS, not least because we
agreed on the need for a proper study into the UFO phenomenon.
My successors didn't share this view and clearly didn't develop
the same working relationship that I'd enjoyed. Had I been
there, I would have counselled very strongly against briefing
third parties on DIS projects, or passing DIS documents to
others, without their prior consent. This is what led to my
successors being cut out of the loop, when they should have been
regarded as the major stakeholder, and treated as such.

Best wishes,

Nick Pope


Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com