The Hutton enquiry, I seem to recall, was set up to do this job a few years back but presumably was not seen to be sufficiently rigourous, so we’re going through the motions again. The problem with all these things is that the outcome is completely predictable (and – if you’re a little cynical – also completely malleable and manageable) depending on what questions you ask.
Strangely, I see a slight parallel in the mortgage world. Many are speaking of the MMR as a fait accompli despite the FSA’s protestations that everything is still up for negotiation. That may have something to do with the fact that ‘consultation’ in these matters revolves around 33 specific points from a 118 page document – in other words the areas where input is required is kept to a minimum and any results can be stage managed through the art of asking the ‘right’ question.
Because at the end of it all, we are presented with the answers which, stripped of their formative parent questions, could be vulnerable to all kinds of interpretations.
You may remember (years ago) a famous brand of cat food which advertised itself by saying: “8 out of 10 owners who expressed a preference said their cats preferred it.” Preferred it to what? Soap powder? Manchester United? The Teletubbies?
Without a question, you can make the answer mean anything you want.
