Day 20: Hoon key points

Here are the main points from Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon's evidence on Day 20 of the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly

Mr Hoon said he saw and authorised a Ministry of Defence press statement of 8 July, which announced that an official had come forward to volunteer he had met BBC defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan.

Mr Hoon said he had been concerned that by then this person had come forward with "something relevant to say on the subject of two parliamentary committees".

None of it would be 'sexing up' unless you were doing something improper in relation to the intelligence judgments Alastair Campbell Alastair Campbell: Key points

"We did not have the option of doing nothing," he said.

Mr Hoon said there was "some concern" that other officials, due to give evidence to the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), would face questions about this matter and the position the government was taking.

The defence secretary said he did not want the government to be accused of covering up the fact someone had come forward. In hindsight, he said he still believed this was the right decision to make.

Mr Hoon said he was aware the MoD press office were proposing to confirm the identity of the individual if the correct name was put.

He had talked with the permanent secretary, Sir Kevin Tebbit, on 9 July, who told him he did not want individual press officers "be seen to be lying to journalists" and it was better to acknowledge the name if put. He did not want the wrong officials being approached by journalists, said Mr Hoon.

I did not brief Dr Kelly's name to any journalists, neither was I aware of any strategy to do so Geoff Hoon

He said Sir Kevin had said at that meeting he was setting out something that had been agreed the night before and checking he agreed.

The press office was left with the choice of whether to tell the truth, lie or obfuscate, he said.

The approach agreed was the "most straightforward", because a no comment response would amount to confirming the name, he said.

He was not shown the question and answer sheet for press officers at the meeting and the press meeting spent longer discussing whether to put Dr Kelly's name in a letter to BBC chairman Gavyn Davies.

Mr Hoon said he always thought Dr Kelly's name would emerge "sooner, rather than later".

In any given situation, people exercise their judgment as reasonably as they could Geoff Hoon

The defence secretary understood that MoD personnel director Richard Hatfield had made it very clear to Dr Kelly it was likely that his name would emerge.

Mr Hoon said he asked his officials to report to him on Dr Kelly's welfare

"I felt there was a balance to be struck between taking an interest in Dr Kelly's welfare and at the same time, not interfering in a personnel process," said Mr Hoon.

"I did not want anyone to suggest there was political interference in the decision and approaches being taken by those responsible for individual personnel matters."

Was that protecting Dr Kelly's anonymity? Jeremy Gompertz QC about letter to BBC chairman naming the scientist

Mr Hoon said he had been heeding advice from Sir Kevin and was having "regard for the man" by limiting the length of time he would have to appear before the various parliamentary committees.

Under cross-examination by Jeremy Gompertz QC, for the Kelly family, Mr Hoon was asked: "Apart from the Walter Mitty slur for which Mr Tom Kelly [the prime minister's official spokesman] has made an unreserved apology, is there anything at all which you feel the government or the MoD had done wrong in relation to the matters with which this inquiry is concerned?"

Mr Hoon said: "In any given situation, people exercise their judgment as reasonably as they could."

There was a possibility that people, with the benefit of hindsight, might have taken judgment decisions "slightly differently", he said.

But in this case he did not believe this would have had any material effect.

His name was leaked, was it not? Jeremy Gompertz QC to Geoff Hoon

Mr Hoon agreed that evidence would show the MoD had "followed very carefully" established procedures and the ministry had "protected" Dr Kelly's anonymity.

Asked if telling the BBC chairman, Gavyn Davies, Dr Kelly's name had been protecting his anonymity, Mr Hoon said that had been done in a confidential letter, with trouble taken to ensure only Mr Davies saw it.

Among other discussions on the issue, he received a message from Jonathan Powell, Downing Street's chief of staff, "which I took to be from the prime minister, saying that it was now appropriate" to name Dr Kelly in a letter to Mr Davies.

Mr Gompertz argued that there was a "deliberate government strategy to leak Dr Kelly's name into the public arena" using press briefings by the prime minister's official spokesman, the press statement, the Q&A strategy and other leaks.

Learned counsel is suggesting that there was some sort of conspiracy right across government ... certainly, as far as I'm concerned, there was no such conspiracy Geoff Hoon

Mr Hoon replied: "You have put that point to a number of witnesses. They have all denied it and I deny it."

Mr Gompertz stressed: "His name was leaked, was it not?"

Mr Hoon replied: "Not by me."

Mr Gompertz said the press statement about the unnamed MoD official coming forward gave details about "a pretty limited class of persons".

The defence secretary commented: "It is obviously a limited class, whether 'pretty limited' depends on how much information you have at the time about Dr Kelly."

GH said that his initial instinct was to throw the book at him, but in fact there was a case for trying to get some kind of plea bargain Alastair Campbell's diary note on conversation with Mr Hoon about Dr Kelly

"I recognised that the issuing of a statement was likely to lead to journalists wanting even more than they had previously to identify Andrew Gilligan's source," said Mr Hoon.

"But there's clear evidence that journalists were already looking for Andrew Gilligan's source. I accept that this was bound to increase their enthusiasm for making that identification."

Mr Hoon said he had no contact with anyone responsible for the shown lobby briefings on 9 July, which included information about the source's identity.

There was not the "slightest shred of evidence" there was a strategy to reveal Dr Kelly's name indirectly, said Mr Hoon.

"Learned counsel is suggesting that there was some sort of conspiracy right across government for all these people to be involved in giving out small parts of information which, he had concluded, provided a picture. But there is just no evidence of that, my Lord. Certainly, as far as I'm concerned, there was no such conspiracy."

The government would have benefited, the BBC would have benefited, and I think most importantly the public would have benefited... ultimately, it was of benefit to everyone that he should give evidence once he had been identified Geoff Hoon on who would benefit when Dr Kelly gave evidence to the FAC

Mr Gompertz said Ms Teare, the MoD press chief, had said that she probably had a copy of the question and answer sheet for press officers with her when she visited his office.

Mr Hoon said: "I think, with the greatest respect, that's a very bad point, to anticipate what Ms Teare had with her at that time. I thought that you seriously misled Pam Teare to the facts put before the inquiry."

Mr Gompertz asked if Mr Hoon thought the Q&A material would help journalists identify Dr Kelly.

The defence secretary said that "with the benefit of hindsight", he could see that "the answers to some of those questions might have assisted journalists in that process, yes".

Mr Hoon said he could not say in what context the phrase "plea bargain" had been used in his talk with Alastair Campbell, but the conversation included whether Dr Kelly might face disciplinary questions.

He said Mr Campbell may have seen Dr Kelly's decision to cooperate and to come forward voluntarily as "a plea bargain".

I knew from the outset that Dr Kelly had some distinctive views about whether Saddam Hussein's regime was still manufacturing weapons of mass destruction Geoff Hoon

Mr Gompertz referred to a passage in Mr Campbell's diary which said: "GH said that his initial instinct was to throw the book at him, but in fact there was a case for trying to get some kind of plea bargain."

Asked if he recognised those words "as words spoken by you during this telephone conversation?" Mr Hoon replied: "No, I don't."

Mr Hoon explained that because Dr Kelly was coming forward and appeared to be cooperating with the authorities, "that is what one expects of what happens where there is a plea bargain".

Asked if the government could have benefited from Dr Kelly's evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr Hoon replied: "The government would have benefited, the BBC would have benefited, and I think most importantly the public would have benefited... ultimately, it was of benefit to everyone that he should give evidence once he had been identified."

Mr Hoon was asked if he had overruled Sir Kevin's advice that it would be too much for Dr Kelly to appear before both the FAC and the ISC.

Mr Hoon replied: "I think that is a rather simplistic view of a rather detailed process that took place."

Sir Kevin had at first suggested that Dr Kelly should appear before the ISC in public, but by the time Mr Hoon had seen the advice, the option had been withdrawn, said the defence secretary.

Mr Gompertz asked whether the limitations on the questions put to Dr Kelly had been more political than out of a concern for the scientist's welfare.

The defence secretary rejected this, saying that Dr Kelly's interests were at the "forefront" of his mind.

Asked about the level of stress the scientist would have been under, Mr Hoon said: "I recognise that giving evidence in public is always more difficult than giving evidence in private."