Report comment

As others have commented, to raise the effect on vulnerable individual complainants is risible. Who genuinely believes that vulnerable complainants would liken themselves to the MOD?

In any event, it would be simple to make it clear that this is exceptional; that disclosure is necessary precisely because the MOD is a government department and because the SRA should be above any suggestion of political interference.

I have also still not seen any possible explanation of what policy discussions need to take place between the SRA and the MOD.

Discussing policy with the MOJ - fair enough. But the MOD? I genuinely cannot think of a legitimate reason for that, particularly in the context of the MOD as a complainant.

And on that point, the SRA should choose an option and stick to it. Either the MOD was a complainant, or it was a government department discussing policy. That the SRA is now arguing the MOD was both suggests it was perhaps not approaching things as impartially as it should have been...