Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1560
- 1579)
TUESDAY 10 NOVEMBER 1998
MS ANN
GRANT and MR
CRAIG MURRAY
1560. And your fears in his case were that
he was getting too close a link with Sandline?
(Ms Grant) Not with Sandline, no. Our concern
was, and again under many, many extenuating circumstances, that
he was perhaps getting too close to the Kabbah Government and
to the situation and not maintaining the distance he might and
not emphasising solely British Government policy.
Ms Abbott
1561. I would just like to come back to
Mr Murray. On the question of your dealings with a mercenary,
you have indicated to the Committee your reservations about Mr
Spicer and I have to say that certainly some of us on the Committee
share them and he was completely unilluminating about the structure
of the company and does not seem to be able to remember who his
managing director is from one week to another, so you were clearly
uncomfortable with that. Now, Ms Grant has said that she shared
your discomfort and your reservations. Was that your perception
at the time?
(Mr Murray) Yes, I think at the time and since
our views on this matter are genuinely extremely close.
1562. Ms Grant, on the 2nd February, Mr
Penfold sent a minute to the Office where he said quite explicitly
that Sandline were going to purchase arms and equipment and the
provision of training. Do you accept that that minute was proof
of illegal activity by Sandline?
(Ms Grant) It was certainly very strong evidence.
1563. So why was not Customs notified immediately?
(Ms Grant) I thought they were, I have to say,
and—
1564. You thought they were?
(Ms Grant) I thought they were.
1565. So who did you think had done it,
Ms Grant?
(Ms Grant) The desk officer or the head of section,
Tim Andrews or Linda St Cook.
1566. Did you check?
(Ms Grant) I did not and I have apologised for
that to Legg. Again I think the extent to which I have been personally
involved in the transmission of correspondence is always a difficult
one to get right. This was one where I had every confidence in
the desk and the head of section that once the process was in
train, we had already decided or the policy decision had been
taken to refer allegations to Customs & Excise, that they
on their own and with their contacts in Customs & Excise would
make sure that any relevant documents went as soon as possible
and, as I say, I apologised in the context of the Inquiry, the
Legg Inquiry, for not having checked in that case and for not
having personally followed up, which previously I had had no reason
to doubt, the effectiveness and the speed and the performance
of the people on the desk.
1567. But given that Mr Penfold's minute
was de facto proof of the possibility of illegal activity,
is it not surprising that the Legg Inquiry tells us that he was
never sent any reply to this minute and he never received any
other reaction?
(Ms Grant) Could I go back a bit because in fact
the minute was written at my instruction following a meeting of
the 30th January which is also described in the report and which
Mr Murray attended. It was at this meeting that I made very clear
to Mr Penfold that I was concerned about what I was hearing both
from the desk and from Mr Murray in various conversations he had
had that we might not be getting a full account of exactly what
was happening on the ground and I told him to go away and write
down what he had done and this referred to possible meetings in
December, meetings in January and so on. I was concerned that
we were not getting a full account on paper of what was going
on and I made that point explicitly to Mr Penfold. I know that
there were difficulties because of communication, but here he
was in London with the facilities, the secretarial support and
so on to do it.
1568. But then when he sent you the minute,
you did not respond.
(Ms Grant) But the minute was recording what he
had already told us with the one exception, which is at the discussion
that we had had on the 30th January which I asked him to go away
and write up, that there was no mention of arms.
1569. But you thought so little of the implicit
allegation in this minute of illegal activity that you did not
make it your personal responsibility to see that it was followed
up.
(Ms Grant) I did not make it my personal responsibility,
not because I did not think it was important; I did think it was
important, but I thought a process was in train with Customs &
Excise which would make sure that that and other evidence was
properly looked at. You are right, I did not personally take charge
of the correspondence with Customs & Excise and I regret that
now.
1570. Nobody expected you to take charge
of the correspondence, but one might have expected you (a) to
issue instructions and (b) to make sure that the instructions
were followed and you did neither of those things.
(Ms Grant) An instruction to?
1571. Nobody would expect you to take personal
charge of correspondence, but one might have expected you to have
instructed officers to refer the matter to Customs & Excise,
but you did not. You told us that you thought it had happened.
It is quite extraordinary to say that you thought, but you took
no effort to find out whether it had happened or not.
(Ms Grant) I assumed it had happened and it had
not. You are right to find fault with me for that.
Chairman
1572. But that minute which you asked for
was not done for the archives, but surely it was done for a specific
purpose, presumably so that you forward it to those higher than
you in the line?
(Ms Grant) Yes, though, as I say, the important
process in my mind was the one that we had set in train by referring
allegations to Customs & Excise. They were the people who
would have approved. Mr Dales of course, also the minute was marked
to him from me.
1573. It went to Mr Dales?
(Ms Grant) Yes.
1574. But not above him?
(Ms Grant) As far as I am aware, not at that stage.
1575. Even in spite of the Government's
declared policy on arms exports?
(Ms Grant) As I say, we were concerned and we
thought that was important and we referred it to the proper authorities.
Ms Abbott
1576. You say that you referred it to the
proper authorities, but it is Mr Murray actually who said that
the allegation should be passed to Customs.
(Ms Grant) That is true because I was away when
the minute was received.
1577. I wonder if you had been there if
you would have referred it to Customs.
(Ms Grant) I think so, I think so. I have never
had any sort of dilemma about whether or not I should.
1578. Just delay.
(Ms Grant) Delay in the implementation. I think
the policy was clear and I do regret that it was not carried out
as swiftly and as promptly as it might have been.
1579. Right at the beginning the Chairman
of the Committee asked you what you would have done differently
and you said, amongst other things, that you would have taken
more care to promulgate the implications and details of the Order
in Council. Is it not the fact, Ms Grant, not that you failed
to promulgate the implications and the details of the Order in
Council, but Mr Penfold told us he never saw an Order in Council
at all and then and now it seems quite extraordinary that he did
not see the Order in Council and yet he was Her Majesty's Government's
representative in Sierra Leone and actually he also told us that
he had read the UN Resolution, but preferred to go on his own
assumptions as to what it meant?
(Ms Grant) On the Order in Council, he was in
the same position as I think the Legg Report makes clear. I had
not seen the Order in Council either.
| 
