Gavin Williamson sacked

[class387]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48126974

Gavin Williamson has been sacked as defence secretary following an inquiry into a leak from a top-level National Security Council meeting.

Downing Street said the PM had "lost confidence in his ability to serve" and Penny Mordaunt will take on the role.

The inquiry followed reports over a plan to allow Huawei limited access to help build the UK's new 5G network.

Mr Williamson, who has been defence secretary since 2017, "strenuously" denies leaking the information.

In a meeting with Mr Williamson on Wednesday evening, Theresa May told him she had information that provided "compelling evidence" that he was responsible for the unauthorised disclosure.

In a letter confirming his dismissal, she said: "No other, credible version of events to explain this leak has been identified."

Responding in a letter to the PM, Mr Williamson said he was "confident" that a "thorough and formal inquiry" would have "vindicated" his position.

Quite an extreme action to take - there could be a serious problem here. Any opinions?

 

[DarloRich]

If he has breached the Official Secrets Act he should be prosecuted.

 

[bramling]

If he has breached the Official Secrets Act he should be prosecuted.

Agreed. The whole thing sounds pretty disgusting, although it seems he’s been sacked not for the leak but for not complying with TM’s investigation (although that doesn’t mean he wasn’t also the source of the leak).

It’s a bit like on the railway when someone walks off having been told they’re about to be D&A tested - they get dismissed for failing to stay for the test, not because they’re suspected of being under the influence.

With GW insisting upon his innocence I hope there is a proper and fair investigation, as if he’s so insistent he wasn’t responsible for the leak then who was?

 

[DarloRich]

With GW insisting upon his innocence I hope there is a proper and fair investigation, as if he’s so insistent he wasn’t responsible for the leak then who was?

he could be protecting his department and officials from what he considers unfair scrutiny.

PS he apparently swore on his children's lives he was not the source of the leak. Who actually says something like that?

 

[Typhoon]

he could be protecting his department and officials from what he considers unfair scrutiny.

Which could explain the passage from the resignation letter

I am sorry that you feel recent leaks from the National Security Council originated in my department. I emphatically believe this was not the case. I strenuously deny that I was in any way involved in this leak and I am confident that a thorough and formal inquiry would have vindicated my position.

I have always trusted my civil servants, military advisers and staff. I believe the assurances they have given me.

(my emphasis).

The Prime Minister's letter also contains an interesting quote:

In our meeting this evening, I put to you the latest information from the investigation, which provides compelling evidence suggesting your responsibility for the unauthorised disclosure.

No other credible version of events to explain this leak has been identified.

I hope that it is rather more than "it can't be anyone else so it must be you".

This is just one more hostile figure on the government back benches. And I would think both hostile and vocal.

 

[Darandio]

PS he apparently swore on his children's lives he was not the source of the leak. Who actually says something like that?

People who are on Jeremy Kyle.

 

[433N]

I am hoping it wasn't him and whoever it was is identified and this whole shambles of a political party and government are seen for what they are and not let anywhere near power for the rest of my lifetime (and, to be fair to my kids, not theirs either).

 

[DarloRich]

I am hoping it wasn't him and whoever it was is identified and this whole shambles of a political party and government are seen for what they are and not let anywhere near power for the rest of my lifetime (and, to be fair to my kids, not theirs either).

If Corbyn was in charge he would just invite the wrong uns into the meeting to hear the secret briefing direct. They are his chums afterall..............................

 

[433N]

If Corbyn was in charge he would just invite the wrong uns into the meeting to hear the secret briefing direct. They are his chums afterall..............................

You don't know what Corbyn would do if he was in charge - sick to death of that somehow being an excuse for what we have now.

I mean, you can pretend you know if it makes you feel better but I don't think anyone can claim to have 'known' how this government would pan out. If they did, they should have placed a bet because they would have got good odds that Coco the Clown would be looking like a political heavyweight after 2 years.

 

[ainsworth74]

I guess we've found the line at which she'll actually take action against suspected leakers considering that her Cabinet is about as leaky as a sieve.

I must admit it's a tough one. At the same time as the rest of our allies are seriously reconsidering having a Chinese company deeply involved in their telecommunications network we're ploughing on regardless. I mean the US has gone so far as to say:

The US may withhold intelligence from the UK if Theresa May's government uses Chinese fir Huawei to build its next-generation mobile internet infrastructure, an American official has suggested.

“It is the United States’ position that putting Huawei or any other untrustworthy vendor in any part of the 5G telecommunications network is a risk,” said Robert Strayer, the deputy assistant secretary for cyber, international communications and information policy at the US state department.

“If other countries insert and allow untrusted vendors to build out and become the vendors for their 5G networks we will have to reassess the ability for us to share information and be connected with them in the ways that we are today.

“Exactly how that will be done will depend on the risk of the equipment that is put into the networks.”

Source

But at the end of the day the National Security Committee has to be sacrosanct to allow for difficult and sensitive discussions. But still it's hardly reassuring that the Government are persisting with this...

 

[DarloRich]

You don't know what Corbyn would do if he was in charge - sick to death of that somehow being an excuse for what we have now.

Yes I do - the politicial position of Mr Corbyn and his chums is clear in relation to defence, intelligence and security. Perhaps you simply aren't prepared to look. In no way am i excusing "what we have now". I am simply saying your man won't improve things. He is a friend of terrorists and someone who has praised them and attended memorials for despicable terrorist killers on a regular basis. You might be happy with that. I am not.

PS - clearly suggesting the person who leaked should be investigated byu the police is insufficient criticism of "what we have now"!

I mean, you can pretend you know if it makes you feel better but I don't think anyone can claim to have 'known' how this government would pan out. If they did, they should have placed a bet because they would have got good odds that Coco the Clown would be looking like a political heavyweight after 2 years.

what are you on about?

 

[DarloRich]

But at the end of the day the National Security Committee has to be sacrosanct to allow for difficult and sensitive discussions. But still it's hardly reassuring that the Government are persisting with this...

you cant allow a leak form something as sensitive as the National Security Committee. it simply isnt acceptable. Williamson may not be personally responsible for the leak but if it came from his department it is correct he is held accountable for that leak.

 

[Clip]

I guess we've found the line at which she'll actually take action against suspected leakers considering that her Cabinet is about as leaky as a sieve.

I must admit it's a tough one. At the same time as the rest of our allies are seriously reconsidering having a Chinese company deeply involved in their telecommunications network we're ploughing on regardless. I mean the US has gone so far as to say:



Source

But at the end of the day the National Security Committee has to be sacrosanct to allow for difficult and sensitive discussions. But still it's hardly reassuring that the Government are persisting with this...

So whats the difference between the infrastructure being built by them or the use of their mobile phones? Both can be used to monitor and hive off any data they deem fit

 

[edwin_m]

The MoD collectively is the custodian of some of the country's most important secrets, so a leak from that quarter is particularly concerning.

 

[ainsworth74]

you cant allow a leak form something as sensitive as the National Security Committee. it simply isnt acceptable. Williamson may not be personally responsible for the leak but if it came from his department it is correct he is held accountable for that leak.

Of course. Whilst I might have grave concerns over the direction the Government is going on this issue that doesn't excuse a leak from the NSC even if I'm sympathetic to to the view of whoever leaked it. The reality remains that NSC discussions and decisions must remain secret unless there is a collective agreement to make their proceedings public.

So whats the difference between the infrastructure being built by them or the use of their mobile phones? Both can be used to monitor and hive off any data they deem fit

Surely you can see the difference between being able to compromise a single phone and being able to compromise all the data routed through the infrastructure? If you have security concerns regarding a certain brand of phone then you don't use the phone. If you have concerns regarding the transmission of data via the available infrastructure then you have a much more fundamental problem that can't be solved by just not using that manufacturers product.

 

[DarloRich]

Of course. Whilst I might have grave concerns over the direction the Government is going on this issue that doesn't excuse a leak from the NSC even if I'm sympathetic to to the view of whoever leaked it. The reality remains that NSC discussions and decisions must remain secret unless there is a collective agreement to make their proceedings public.

agreed

 

[adrock1976]

Yes I do - the politicial position of Mr Corbyn and his chums is clear in relation to defence, intelligence and security. Perhaps you simply aren't prepared to look. In no way am i excusing "what we have now". I am simply saying your man won't improve things. He is a friend of terrorists and someone who has praised them and attended memorials for despicable terrorist killers on a regular basis. You might be happy with that. I am not.

PS - clearly suggesting the person who leaked should be investigated byu the police is insufficient criticism of "what we have now"!

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" - Mahatma Ghandi
"If you are going to criticise, make sure your own hands are clean" - Bob Marley

The British Government have also done terrible things over the years, for example the recent invasion of Afghanistan where nobody ever bothered to do a body count of the civilian fatalities, the invasion of Australia in the days of the Empire displacing the indigenous population (the Aborigines), selling arms to Saudi Arabia and the Sultan of Brueni (both which have a less than stellar record of human rights), which Saudi Arabia is using in the present conflict with Yemen, and stitching up the Irish when whey wanted to leave the set up. These are some of the dreadful things that the Government have done over the years.

Regarding the leak, my concern is that it would end up being a whitewash although I have based this on the terms of the Hutton Report that was launched the famous sexed up dossier that led to the 2003 Iraq invasion, with a scientist David Kelly having committed suicide soon after.

 

[DarloRich]

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" - Mahatma Ghandi
"If you are going to criticise, make sure your own hands are clean" - Bob Marley

The British Government have also done terrible things over the years, for example the recent invasion of Afghanistan where nobody ever bothered to do a body count of the civilian fatalities, the invasion of Australia in the days of the Empire displacing the indigenous population (the Aborigines), selling arms to Saudi Arabia and the Sultan of Brueni (both which have a less than stellar record of human rights), which Saudi Arabia is using in the present conflict with Yemen, and stitching up the Irish when whey wanted to leave the set up. These are some of the dreadful things that the Government have done over the years.

Typical whataboutery that Corbyn super fans love to deploy to try to excuse the views of their hero. He is a wrong un who supporters terrorists and murderers. That clearly doesn't bother you.

Regarding the leak, my concern is that it would end up being a whitewash although I have based this on the terms of the Hutton Report that was launched the famous sexed up dossier that led to the 2003 Iraq invasion, with a scientist David Kelly having committed suicide soon after.

an entirely different example - this a straight forward matter.

 

[Clip]

Surely you can see the difference between being able to compromise a single phone and being able to compromise all the data routed through the infrastructure? If you have security concerns regarding a certain brand of phone then you don't use the phone. If you have concerns regarding the transmission of data via the available infrastructure then you have a much more fundamental problem that can't be solved by just not using that manufacturers product.

Of course i can it was very much a flippant remark because lots of people use their phones already and the likes of Apple and google probably capture more about you than people would ever be surprised about yet suddenly cos its a chinese company and the yanks dont like them its panic stations?

 

[thejuggler]

8 years ago Liam Fox jumped before he was sacked for similar misdemeanours.

Whatever happened to him?

Or yeah, he sat tight, bided his time and came back 5 years later. Williamson is only 42, he will do the same. May will be gone very soon and all will be forgotten.

 

[MotCO]

Quote: "Mr Williamson, who has been defence secretary since 2017, "strenuously" denies leaking the information."

I'm not sure who to believe. However, would Mr Williamson publicly admit to being the leak? If there is a danger that he will be arrested and charged, he is hardly likely to publicly admit the offence.

 

[edwin_m]

Perhaps someone just mentioned it on a Huawei mobile and the Chinese government leaked it?

 

[Groningen]

It is a public secret that Huawei tries to spy on the countries it is doing business with. In fact is the Chinese government the boss for companies outside China. USA tries to warn us, but also has no clean hands.

 

[Busaholic]

he could be protecting his department and officials from what he considers unfair scrutiny.

PS he apparently swore on his children's lives he was not the source of the leak. Who actually says something like that?

I'll think you'll find that the Rt Hon Jonathan Aitken MP made a similar statement during his court libel action against Granada Television and the Guardian newspaper, which he famously lost and, as a result of what had transpired, faced a trial for perjury. He pleaded guilty, so avoiding a trial, and received a jail sentence. Maybe Williamson was unaware of the precedent, ignorance being bliss amongst the current generation of so-called politicians.

 

[NoMorePacers]

Typical whataboutery that Corbyn super fans love to deploy to try to excuse the views of their hero. He is a wrong un who supporters terrorists and murderers. That clearly doesn't bother you.



an entirely different example - this a straight forward matter.

But he wasn't talking about Corbyn.

 

[Kite159]

It was probably leaked when a civil servant left a copy of the minutes in a taxi/bus/train etc.

 

[HH]

PS he apparently swore on his children's lives he was not the source of the leak. Who actually says something like that?

Er, Harry Kane...

 

[edwin_m]

I'll think you'll find that the Rt Hon Jonathan Aitken MP made a similar statement during his court libel action against Granada Television and the Guardian newspaper, which he famously lost and, as a result of what had transpired, faced a trial for perjury. He pleaded guilty, so avoiding a trial, and received a jail sentence. Maybe Williamson was unaware of the precedent, ignorance being bliss amongst the current generation of so-called politicians.

I think Jonathan Aitken's most famous statement was about the sword of truth. The one I recall was John Selwyn Gummer feeding his daughter a burger during the mad cow crisis.

 

[Busaholic]

I think Jonathan Aitken's most famous statement was about the sword of truth. The one I recall was John Selwyn Gummer feeding his daughter a burger during the mad cow crisis.

I agree that those are the facets which most would remember about these two gentlemen (I use the word loosely) but Aitken's twin daughter Victoria was produced as a witness by her father and, by chance, I heard a story surrounding this evidence. A friend of mine was dining in a restaurant in London one evening and at the next table he recognised Aitken with someone whom he quickly realised was his daughter. My friend listened with incredulity as Aitken spelled out to her what she was to say on his behalf: I think this was a week or two before the court appearance. I can say this now because of what eventually happened, with his conviction for Perverting the Course of Justice and, of course, his public acceptance of his wrongdoing, a rare thing amongst those in public life in modern times. So that was the parallel I was drawing, which isn't exactly the same, I admit. I've had a cursory glance at the internet and there's certainly some background there.

 

[jon0844]

People who are on Jeremy Kyle.

But you wouldn't expect a politician to be on a show like Jeremy Kyle.

I mean, that programme has to maintain SOME standards.