Very quick post on Cameron and whether Gus O’Donnell advised him not to appoint Coulson…..note also that Coulson was security vetted…..
From Leveson…..Gus O’Donnell says he had no part in Coulson’s appointment…the BBC have been trying to say he did and are claiming they couldn’t find this…..
Question 30 – Please set out in full for the inquiry details of your role, if any, in relation to the appointment by the Prime Minster of Andy Coulson to a post in No.10. Your account should include a full explanation of the basis on which you were asked to advise.
‘Mr Coulson was brought in as a special adviser to the Prime Minister. I was not involved in the process of appointing Mr Coulson. Mr Coulson was cleared to SC (security clearance) level and was undergoing DV (developed vetting) clearance at the time of his resignation’
As Coulson was SC cleared he could perfectly well be employed:
Coulson, as SC cleared, could see secret, and even top secret material…..the BBC’s Robert Peston seems to be wrong…no ‘failure to vet Coulson’ :
The BBC’s Robert Peston on the vetting question
I know the answer to why Coulson was not given top level security vetting in 2010.
What happened was that Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood had decided that too many special advisers had access to the highest level of security clearance and wanted to reduce their number.
So he made a policy decision, without pressure from David Cameron, not to get Coulson cleared for access to such material. At the same time, Mr Cameron’s chief of staff Ed Llewellyn was given the most vigorous degree of vetting, because of his foreign policy role.
Sir Jeremy simply felt it was inappropriate for large numbers of SPADs – as special advisers are known at Westminster – to have access to this material.
He subsequently decided Coulson was a good egg and could have access to this top secret sensitive material, even though he had not been cleared. So if anyone is going to be embarrassed by the failure to vet Coulson, and Labour’s investigation into this, it will be Britain’s top civil servant, Sir Jeremy Heywood.
No comments? Or is this the foreword to the ‘Forensic’ thread.
Good all the same as it helps undermine Labour’s pathetic flapping about this issue and yet another BBC front line reporter seen to be woefully informed/ disingenuous/ lying…