Day 16: Key points

Here are the key points from evidence of witnesses on day 16 of the Hutton inquiry into the death of government scientist Dr David Kelly with the most recent witness first.

Greg Dyke

The BBC director general said if the corporation made mistakes he believed it should apologise for them and gave examples where this had happened.

Mr Dyke said that an an attack on the BBC by Alastair Campbell during evidence to a Commons committee was "pretty near unprecedented".

Alastair Campbell launched a broadside against the whole of BBC journalism Greg Dyke New witness list

Mr Dyke said he asked the controller of editorial policy, Stephen Wittle, to look into the report by Today programme defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan.

The director general conceded the charge the government inserted information into the September dossier knowing it to be false was "pretty serious".

He added: "But there is a distinction between a charge made by the BBC and a charge made by a source to the BBC.

"They carry a different degree of gravity."

The attack Mr Campbell made during his evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee had not been confined to Mr Gilligan's report but accused the BBC of "running an agenda against the war".

"He had launched a broadside against the whole of BBC journalism and by this time it seemed to me an external attack, and we had to take some action," said Mr Dyke.

He said he subsequently opted not to reply to a personal letter from Mr Campbell.

"I'm not sure there was an opportunity to put the genie back in the bottle. It was then a really very big public issue," he told the inquiry.

Mr Dyke said it had appeared both to him and to BBC director of news Richard Sambrook that the purpose of Mr Campbell's attack was to divert attention from his role in the so-called dodgy dossier released in February.

The director general said that in hindsight he wished he had referred the issues raised in a open letter from Mr Campbell to Mr Sambrook to the official BBC complaints procedure rather than opting to reply to it directly.

Andrew Gilligan's e-mails to an MP investigating broadcasts about his Iraq dossier claims were "not acceptable", said Mr Dyke.

Dr Richard Scott

Dr Scott of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), was Dr Kelly's line manager from July 2000 and as such was responsible for the scientist's work under secondment as well as his welfare.

He said he met Dr Kelly four to five times a year last meeting him in April.

That information came late in August but has only confirmed what we had judged ourselves and what we had seen by the Iraqis' use of these weapons in the past Sir Joe French on the 45 minute claim

Dr Scott said that Dr Kelly was "quite difficult" to manage because he did not understand the challenges of DSTL as he was working on secondment elsewhere.

He said that Dr Kelly's pay had been properly assessed but that was not "passed back" to him before he died.

Dr Scott said he was well aware that Dr Kelly had contacts with the media as he used to highlight the fact in his annual reports.

Dr Kelly was offered "pastoral care" by Dr Scott who said he sensed the scientist was upset after being advised to leave home ahead of being named to journalists.

Sir Richard Dearlove

The head of the MI6 intelligence service said he was not aware off officials expressing unhappiness about the September dossier or how it was put together.

Sir Richard - giving evidence by audiolink - said he had sanctioned the use of some intelligence in a published report but he insisted on the right of veto "on the grounds of source protection".

He said he was "rather amused" about the concern over the 45 minute claim being from a single source.

He said: "Much high quality intelligence which is factual or proved to be factual is single source material."

He said that "with the benefit of hindsight" there had been some valid criticism over the prominence given to the 45-minute claim because it had come in for "misinterpretation".

"I think what subsequently happened in the reporting was that it was taken that the 45 minutes applied, let's say, to weapons of a longer range, just battlefield material," said Sir Richard.

Dr David Kelly's reported comment that there had been a row over the 45-minute claim between Number 10 and the intelligence services was not an accurate picture of the events of September 2002, said Sir Richard.

He added that he was "shocked" that Dr Kelly had had an unauthorised conversation with a journalist over an intelligence report.

Air Marshal Sir Joe French

The former head of the Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) defended the inclusion of the 45 minute warning in the September dossier.

He said the role of DIS was to collect and analyse intelligence and to provide information for those deployed on operations.

Sir Joe said the source for the warning was from a "very reliable source and one that had been used for quite some time".

Quizzed about the content of the dossier he said: "I have no difficulty with the language finally used in the dossier. I was content."

The air marshal told the inquiry that he did not know Dr Kelly.

Tony Cragg

Mr Cragg was Sir Joe's deputy but is now also retired.

He told the inquiry that DIS was concerned about the executive summary of the dossier and its "discontinuity" with the main text.

I and my senior managers were satisfied with the outcome and I have no reason to think Air Marshal French was not satisfied with the outcome - if I had not been satisfied, I would have said so Tony Cragg Key questions for Hutton

"I put this down to the fact that the executive summary pulled together or reflected not merely recent intelligence which was being - which was contained - in the main text but also the general context of the new intelligence which had been received."

Mr Cragg said he did not believe the 45 minute claim was given undue prominence in the dossier.

He said his view was that the dossier was prepared and produced "by a rigorous process of drafting".

He said that staff concerns over the dossier were dealt with satisfactorily.