"...but they'd left it in the ROC budget because the dog ate it."

Posted By: Joiner"...but they'd left it in the ROC budget because the dog ate it."https:///forum114/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/bigsmile.gif" alt="" title="" >

I couldn't help myself, it really did just read like a Yes Minister script, and publishing it as a technical note in an obscurely titled document hidden on a largely unrelated web page on a date when the industry was otherwise engaged with absolutely no other form of public announcement was an absolute master stroke in the burying an announcement stakes.

It does make me wonder a bit what or who it was they were scared of when they did it.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: ted</cite>Also seems strange that this wasn't worth mentioning at the Select Committee meeting just a week earlier.</blockquote>

Not just strange, but just another example of the way that DECC seem quite willing to deceive parliament, something that really should result in disciplinary action for those involved (starting with the PS who deliberately mislead the SC with the way she chose to present evidence).

I've once had the misfortune to see an ex-boss do this and well recall the jaw-dropping horror of hearing him lie to a Select Committee. He disappeared from government shortly afterwards.

For those unfamiliar with the principles involved here, here's a link to the Civil Service Code: http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/civil-service-code-2010.pdf

The specific sections that relate to the way that DECC officials behaved to the Select Committee are these:

"<i><b>Honesty</b>
8. You must:
• set out the facts and relevant issues truthfully, and correct any errors as soon as possible; and
• use resources only for the authorised public purposes for which they are provided.

9. You must not:
• deceive or knowingly mislead Ministers, Parliament or others; or
• be influenced by improper pressures from others or the prospect of personal gain.

<b>Objectivity</b>
10. You must:
• provide information and advice, including advice to Ministers, on the basis of the evidence, and accurately present the options and facts;
• take decisions on the merits of the case; and
• take due account of expert and professional advice.

11. You must not:
• ignore inconvenient facts or relevant considerations when providing advice or making decisions; or
• frustrate the implementation of policies once decisions are taken by declining to take, or abstaining
from, action which flows from those decisions.</i>"

Posted By: tedAlso seems strange that this wasn't worth mentioning at the Select Committee meeting just a week earlier.

They could conceivably argue that the decision was taken after the select committee meeting being as this document was published on the 8th Dec, after the select committee meeting.

btw, I'm working on digging up some information on something else that I reckon ought to blow all treasury related arguments on this squarely out of the water... work in progress though, but watch this space.