Page 1


6-gL.:|- -

6"l"su’1 L.\I* g.^6.r"t-l F*"f ETc-torr,re’ ’ac’LJure’ + r a ( , ’ ! a .) &D."ft o4.^s- +t /slt’:s "Ls"’e- 3? ^)e)

4)

fs/u S S

?s1o!osS 4S

33

i


SUBSIDIARY POINTS Mlitary Task 9 is to mahtain the i:rtegrity of the UK’s airspace. This require,ment is met by the coatinuous recognised air pictrue (radar)and an air policing capability. Any threat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled in the light of the particular circumstances at the time (it migbt, if deem.ed appropriatg involve the scrambling or diversion of RAF air deftnce aircraft). Alleged sightings sent to us are examined but consulation with air defence staff and others ats ncessary is considered only where there is suffrcient evidence to suggest a breach of tIK air Only a handful of reports have been received in recent years that warranted any firrther investigatiol atrd no evidence was found of any threat. Where there is no evidence in a report of defence concern, no action is taken to try and ideirti$ what migbt have been From the types of descriptions gererally received" aircraft or uatural phenomena probably account for most of the

*

*

space.

*

seen.

observations.

;issues. SeclaS)z is the Air Statt Secretariat. lt deals wrth a wrde range of RA!’-reiated

It also acts as the focal point within MOD for the Government’s limited interest ia A 24-hou’enqwerphone is provided so that members of the public can telephone througb sighting reports. Reports made elsewhere, either to military establisbments, air trafflc control centres or the civilian police are forwarded to Sec(AS)2. Some 230 sighting reports and 250 letters were received last year Where a military or civilian pilot considers his aircraft has 6sen eo.Jangered by the proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object he is unable to identifu), or in regulated ainpace where an Air Traffrc Controller believes there has been the risk of a collision, the pilot or ATC would be obliged to file an airmiss report (Airprox).

’lJFOs’.

*


ovsmbsr 15,lg99

rage

rl J

and DoCUMENTS photogrtphs detailing |n rnvasltgalions UFO Edlafn orrer 50 yealt are at last being made public

avallable for und,er scrutiny policyNew Labour’s grealer opennessofin Government, according to reports at the weekend. NICK POPE,theHere. Ministry of Defence otlicial f ormerly rsponsible for investigating lerrestrial visitations, previews the eagerly

ertra-

awaited contenls.

^4. inter-

FFICIAL in Utr’OS has always had more Ilf II est o do withthan the I vzt Russians any impending from visii Martians. llut inSoviet, keeping an eye out fot that llr{: aircraft probed rlll|tinely during aif ourCold (lrf.nccs the

-

-

War, clear it soonwerebecame that there other more exotlc oDeratins craft in British airspace. There has been a steady

stream of UFO reports sent

to thetheMinistry Defence past 50ofyearc over l)r’twccn 200 to 300 each year, ’l’ho!, thanhave files, l,ofillI[,more which filcs had I 200 i{r.cess. and when, they are rnude available publicly, I can promiEe 6ome exciting revel&I’lons. FQr hree years it was my iob (Air Staln 2A at in Secret.ariat loD [o to investigate lllc rcport.s. determincsuch nny t

UK.oui

l,hreat toforlhe90 pc ofI t)t|l.nnLial found exDlanations

rof

CK E(}n\i-q rI ofthat the most faseinattns investisateii rldted to anI early POPE )din theIncldent hoursthat

tl.ere

been c(a core fhat be where observers sE such pollc omcers and Dllots havs seen unldentlfied dratt dolnE speeds and manoeuyres wai beyond our cspabll Britaln’s most sensaHonal UFO caae occurrd RendleEham Forest.lnatnear1980theln IISAF/r..AF airbase bridge ln Suffo IrFOa Ity waa wltnessed oveE serles ght8, then on December of 26 at, zqm two patmlrnen on a iourbright of thelights camDamons Derlmeter saw the trees and went to investfgate. Initlally, they an thoupht aircraft had overshot, the runway, although there was no But whataccompanylng they saw waa noise. like no alF craft, had they ever tred before; a larse metallic. triangular thev chased beforobject losincwhich It arnonL

^i.ralned

..

es.

-The- U.S.

Hfiry#’Hffho"fr’ou’"*’* government’a o_enlal nraa not helped by re cratms of a fortner U,S.whoarmv colonel, Corso. sata that thefrom so-called Roswetl lncident in whlch alen corpses were aueEedly PhrllD

194?

tree8-

-

There lstape,also eerle anreveals lS.rdnute whlch conversa0lon8 between and as they movedHalt menyards to wlthinhls150 red and yellow of the moylnc

ltghts.

Lt-

The report that suddenly the ltshtssaya irDDeared to

nanlater.j-ets

yeara Almostof40 number RAF Tomado a wer wele overtaken overDaxen Dty uF UF1C C,over the Sea WIn aNovember 1900.North No Bdequate tion was ver\ Last

exDlanaforthcorrdnc-

the detail UFOs wena botJr

’explode’ In fragments of ?37 Ir 1995, the Dtlots ofs Boetnc n’hlte ltsht. Immedlatelv. encountered

seen an alr force basedldlir New atMex|co lnvolve the ffash ofreallv a Colonel Corso claimed that he’d seen the bodles, and that pentaEon his nndlng at theways hvolved use to tne technologlcal greaned the debriasecreta fom ofthe He dled alter of a sotnc heart attack shorHy pubtic wlth these ctalms. took the sesrets to lris qrave.s6 Consplracy theorlsii love thls sorttoofbe thlns, and are uditely by anv release of papers that doesnt support thefu own tlreories. But there really isn,t anv ltr the slthoush athlettr sent liom the MoD gwemment Io that MoD pollcytn 1965 rhe subJect toof years My three of ofncial research the phenomenonlnto chansed mvUFO life for ever. IU come tnto thbiob as sceptic, a but came’to believe weU be that some ItIEs misht If these espeople are are mflde pubuc, I thlnk to be ln ior

.lob

was

whatm UfO thei Col HaIt observed fhree descrtbed ds a bdEhtlv gbJects the ln slw’ llke crhile aDDioach on thelr to but givbg ofi rcd, green an<i Manchester Afrpbrt, and

stars.

-

U.g.A stmllar initia ve in the

sbnply fueUed interest tn the subject, accusatlons thatand otherled moreto

encoun-

craft.

IIFO-

satk-ned cover-up UK. progeDroceu.S. .ts which-link-snd 8,"%"lor"" admtts-

of local crop Edgecombe and submltted and reports I, ar routlne roume one the UPO save that then Prime on tlrc revlewed the all about crop clrcles lle many are hoaxes, r those whlch have vet plalned; for why crop samples taken

exa-rllple,

TNIClrPOPE’S

Owrat,/8 imDor-con- Lat4stboohis ntundtr& (Sinon

.

ChiLt

cemed the truth 16 in there! Schusteri N.99)

of

(. WbodactJv-

the

a big like Burprise, and I belleve that, me,thisthey come see to ls wlll a serlous that aublect srhlch ralses tan[ mtloaaj securlty lssues. As far as these flles ate

by

-

extra-terrestdal

.’


- _-

:.+R a.* :.E !’rs i : ! ’ , 8 : !.i6IelE-* l-ra’+E -l;:xdg a.r :rl -ii3* .rJ =’ iffiffiffilffiffiigl g -uiEsE:;:.9" s I\ rl F I’ F zd FrA o= lliiiir*rfEr*Eif: =r3 t= lo tr orl IIlr E

d’3r *P! Ci=,t;i’ rg { Hi* fE Eai6qegdqiu5dg’:*’=9 4 e; oE 5 &+p;. =; Fd Ffl$ ?iIP g;i;Ai=:;= sF3.t E [1e e,’rEE;:q n j =4 :* e 9 ilFo +H;3FElE*E-EFE;i rec q fEFi 16: i ;Ei:i3;fE 3S= iB*5; itifrtlqai r d; t i6: =: irrr r 6e3 ln.g’FF r:o Fi 3*: i, i;FF ?H?f$aai{5 iaE EBd 86 i E

;=-.f \

\

g rt 3 =g E

1!E

D

- - -;- -;" r --_ II

D o HliHEiii;ffiiii:iFi Cm Eo

lrtg} to ’iEIE lrt trl

= o Eo =!! E f=g o lrl o o it ili*ffi*im;ffi$ !,6’ ls co l= =’ Ff?t;iicii:igiga;lgE t;’3 r!;’i ; 6 q!9" "F:;+ir:; f’cq;:F6o-:;’ r:5 += *-q ;:lsi’SL E;E; ii:E;pd’ :; s! 6’; ":9 -*,.- *E5rE"-f;s.sEqi :-9F’e:<6;tEFg.;:t’::-’ ;89.!-e q-,-:9:i’; ^ : 9 33o. T5iia= 3.;+ l. ii;i.6- :.:?g-3’ _f i;* =ii’8. ei

E. . ,-\

o3 I I’

!

ia f

III

IO

!

1t3 g;

a’E’?

H ia:E ego It9F*=E 3a 3o 3;

e ieE

15 9 :HE 3g+9E’ ; *3 .J: o’l3

i’5lF3e5BE 5E i;g ;

s

o 6;

EE: t9 i 1: iiY qi g T! =rE EZ *E i esg; 9 7: :gE I i iE E igF r6

49

I’D EO

o

gf=f1g F*$i =ES 5 [$3Bg;i fr*d ca *i{ fF [[Es;j 15; o 3

E

o aD f

r[f;

FFE-""*e,f,i x +i’E li = g=;$[aat:=:flE o i;pfgffifiel3iglill|+rr [*[[iis[[iii onXS’ F E3:rfSHs3 ;ir: liTI; sif; sll e fq; t$ lg ;;+:.H; i igil iggE’E 5l+9 I

6

E

{r oar o e og’ rt og !l!l C Eox o o

aEdr-d_


NEWS OF THE WORLD, Novgmber 14,lgSg 7

IflDIIAP wTERROR . rrrstw’. won.n Two mon

A

ry

YOUIIG

.

at the cantr! ol klG nap scare la3t nlgtt 8ft9r a bloo+6teln6d van eha !ra3 bundled Into tomd abaD

don6d,

had earllgr roughly drrgggsd hsr scaCamlng acnolt a galtgo torecourt at Rsadlr, Ecrtr, durlng the rushlto{f. She was vlchurly b.rtrn and throwr Ir o tha van, A wltne!6 told pollc tho woman, aged rbout iored taclal In urle3. m, Detectlve Tlevor DavlesSupadrltendent said: "We are extremely thla got InIttouch woman canwolriod.

8ut-

wlth u5 Bhe should." A toam ot alatectlvca t{6.6 trylng to ldertuay the womarl and scou.ing misslng pa’son rcpoTts. The ga.aieCCIV iootage

from seen bythepollce. has been

t,r.l:

Si Chung, n,ho tti?d his to sove 26, lhitialt tu l,uadon Jare lqnt,.|’ r,(lSTl,tC trif’rss4 (uuqht in lhp e and I’ss irr"ienin.t ofii.sho fu Jtv Ee.ks.

Briatl-- -At ROBBED ’spaceHil -NorKilfoyle. ddee-2g-yearokl cvery. year. !’ , ieers. repotted. itv.sion llti,l l: i3"11’,Jf,1?,LrlJT,* .r!i:. X-h-iles sirmei-ittiienrTJt,* hall. white’lhe movc. ilnccgi-a s e crecy. frnzy. -blofl-upand cor-jockeft, year.zig-zsgsspotcovr-up.theoMODET

GAiIG of Rolex mbbera Apo(nced on Andaea Fo!lke6. the channel QVC Shoppirg ch Darked nrodel. as hel cfir in the early ho{rs. The blondc wn$ Erabbed by the throat hv on lnan while anothea

snatched her 92,51’0 Cartlt

ofr In a Ti’drtdcarand$ithmlde her ilag.eolF

And.ea

pullod up struck as In Sloane Souare. London, COPS smashed into

a cdt toin ftscua Ltong,a I’rance, mon colloDged lnsld’

ao fool

a discovercd dumm! u6ed

IIIURDER OF BABY AN elght-week-old boy was murdred home yesterday in ahigLenzid by

Police found little Bradldy Geo,Ee being cradled by his soblring mother. He died tour hours laler ifl hospital from The tot’s murn Samanlha George, brothet Christopher, fiv6, elao fered had Inlurla3 h th attack et the trobed cou$

20, and.

Walos-

sr|’-

hous In t||edlryt Tydfl, cil Soulh Nelghbour Hussey 3ald: Joan[ott. $,oman screamlnghoard and aa yo(ng boy crylng. Samantha cane oul rillh hci lecc co$ rod In blood aod waa takon away In an anbulance." A btr pollcetn9nat wag a.rested house and was bolng qu+the ycstaday.

"l

2Gyoar-old

tionGd

THE truth about whether

X-

iens have ever vasited ain is to be revealed at last. Top secret government Files on thousands of ship’ riddles will be opened

up to public gaze by Defence Minister The),ofwillPeter include nhotos and tails Ul’OEveryinvestigalion the past :j0 aroundin

-

KINBY Pi)t

300 alien sightings are b by milllery expefts for action S inPlans lhe event of an alien of Ldodon will also be unveiled.

s.:Fred in a p

rnb nuclea ?liles,

The

governmenl drive to unnecessafy end sure to senda is UFO spotterr They willinlo hope to sectets about: MASSIVE craft aAlearn ted flyinE in Sea Britain’s North The ofl coast lastshot 900ft UFO off l?,000mph wher| at sued by two tiEhter lets. aclAl s ahit selven UFOS have crached in Britain War Il. since World

pur-

Grank preSecone-time inve6li-

-

Pope believes llE was ducted inbyFlorida. aliens while dliving He kepl num urhile in his iob lor leot ol betno Iob;IIel a ;tank’ But after he lesvihg $ecret wrolethea bestsellets series of aborr! alien incidents. He said: encs convinced sroWe a lesl snd lhreateningme lhat alohe. t|oh. ale nol rce l$:r9. the MoD hss heard of UFO sightings, though that’s cnly tip of the iceberg." lencetheMinister Mr Kilfoyle haB Jolleagues that, after o careful of the files. he is "not convinced" the existenc ol alienr, MoD slaff say he wonlj people to to tnoke uo theh ovn iource seid: Iiles of public interest. They paint arre reports g pictur of howwhatUFO would allensOureverVie$’: did land in Blitain," Poge 22

US sirmen fro;1 two (he nearby bases claim out objecl roset hoveringthen of lhe space al ah blasled intosoesd. incredible RAF invesligator6_cordoned off the area. b t their findings are still s guafded secret. details of UFO sightings in the Some Fifties and have already been made publictounder theddcuments. Rule appled sensitive ahem is the lomo$s 1962 Anong dent in vhich geciecy Anne Hetton she rcpoded rrco srf,orn to object after shootitrg oua seeing red anda green.flomes aboue het home inTen Tauaton, Somerse| yesrs earlier, RAF Flight shining object ant John Kilburna 6sw e Yorkr in the sky West when jetsabove were scrahbled tosir bese.

Sir-(ties

-

ab-

space-For-

rees.

J

Britain’sbyfil6thewreMoD’s pared hush-hush Aircralt set up to retariat. gate UFOs. Amazingly. boss Nick its

aSlGHTlllGS oI a trlanguthree-legged lar ship in Rendlesham

e6t, Suflolk, in 1980.

c( rli(I :,{i()f.tl rf N

The pledge Io open up our Lot’l moves infollows Ametica. he Yanks recently lcased report th a notorious Roswellof dent in 194?, in which wcle alien corpses secrea seen alaira base. edl!, New Mexico the They explained ’’bodies’ wele dummies secrt westher from B balloon, UFO rists stillbut has been a believe there

bo oof brn ket deep helol should. released bi in lhree monlhs. jtart of a I

rr,

the UFO look off al an incredible Butat’ethe facts about most later away. stillthelocked irclude truth altout claims defence chipf L(Jrd hnt RAF Fcltwoll in Suffolk uses rsdar, built by the US Ail it to track Ulfos. quizzed minislers abou( the base.

unit.

"Mt,experi-

phe-

closely-

prob-

re-

Thidy-Year

incil 6 r e a r o l d star-llke

minds-fasci-These Lieuten- rvstigated-and hapinvesti-

I

::


/

6rye"^ e7l3

-

Loose Minute D/Sec(AS/64l1 1

August 2000

pcc(RAF) so2(Ec) Copy to: Gp Capt CC,HQSTC DAO.ADGEI

_

REQUEST FOR FILMING REAL WORLD PICTURES ’RA,F UFO WATCH’

Reference: DCC(RAFy337 I 04 dated 24 July 2000 Thank you for your minute about Real Worid’s request and the attachment setting out tleir plans for a special investigating claims of ’llF0s’ and alien abductions. I note that the company’s aim is to show that there is no evidence to support claims of ’UFOs’and aliens; that belief in such claims can be ’deeply destructive’ and that despite claims that ’thousands ofpeople are being abducted by aliens and seei:rg UFOs, national defence systems are not picking up any alien space A laudable aim but we know from a wealth of experience that those who believe in the ’UFO’phenomena are not swayed by facts that do not meet their own

1.

craft’.

two-hour

.

interpretation of events Real World say that as part of their effort to bring people ’back to reality’ they want to ask questions of someone responsible for the security of ’British Air Space’ and film in a radar Howwer, the questionsTothey have in mind are wide of any MOD interests in alleged sigbtings of date the Depaxmetrt has not accepted any media requests to participate in initiatives because ofthe very limited interest it (and the Government) has in tlese matters. Agreeing to this request would compromise the Deparftnent’s integrity and we cannot support In reaching this decision I dlscussed the request with DAO staff; their view was that there was no value for the RAF in participating in the programme. It might be helpful instead to offer Real World a note about our limited interest and you may wish to draw on the following paragraphs in your reply: The integrity of the UK’s airspace in peacetime is maintained through continuous surveillance of the UK Air Defence Region and the MOD remains vigilant for any potential military MOD’s interest in reports it receives from members of the public witnessing something they are unable to identify is limited to establishing whether what has been seen might be of defence significancg namely whether the integrity of the UK Air Defence Region has been compromised by hostile or unauthorized air activity. Ali alleged sighting reports are looked at individually and examined in detail commensurate with the amount of information provided; the vast majority of

2.

room.

’UFOs’.’UFO’-related

3.

theat.

it.


fficffiHffiffiffiEAcroNsLrP ffi EERrlcel

DO NOT DESTROY

lpATFpf F/os/rooo I

E@ffi Effi

FOR UNOPENED FILES MAGAZINE

SO1 COMMENTS

DGG(RAF) PS

SOI(lC+E)

sol(Ec) so2(Ec) DPR COMMENTS

GENERAL REA’ARKS

sro

ACTIOI’l

INFO

ACTIOI’l

INFO

ACTION

INFO

ACTION

INFO

ACT|Ol{

INFO

ACTION

INFO

s03(Ec)

ACTION INFO

so3(lc+E)

ACTION INFO

sGT(rNT)

ACTION

SGT(PHOT)

ACTtOI{ INFO

ADMIN

ACTION

INFO

DPO(RAF) ACTION GC CC STC ACTIOH coPtEs GC CC PTC ACTION ONLY GC CG (RES) ACTlON

INFO

DEADUNE RESPONSE DATE DPR STAFF DETAII.ED:

INFO

INFO INFO INFO


_15*+

’ifbcr

-I331,;’!-:1T""TlAt ranr a

t" -" #" -@

co*iulrrt, tu#:ffi t ;gh rir

i:"ff# secretivet ,pggp,***;ffi nxffi*EIfr*- a:it.*;r;*1";xn: ffil:,ffitrl".ffi

n-M:nffi y",i;1;"’#,,j;,[’i:l=t** -. - ^ ,

*ffiffi g1fir"ffii#tr$’pnffiffi:s’’*fiffitffif "";j llij.’:. .

" ’ lot$teffiH rrarnenrary watcb dn,

^vwru4J ds tnesc^tri.h

;1f:"’ft*ffi*.",*""rli ’,$ffi 6#..THF uffi ul-*’#,1;il/*’{filTF"*F,:,iffi ,T*li:’glfr*$ffiffidffiffitrffi ffiffi*gffiWffiff’ffiT flm$ffiffif*ffiwipf ror a rcstricted lolormatjon bill

vr (woc

{fi;ffiT,f;:;ml’"$ ,lnff 6;6qi*x1l*c"l;: Ifl fig*tFrTi:fflili#.t:ffiSifig

",ilL,iii1ii:t*"1,q1,r4:: pqip",al:,:m,"r;

I13."^".’!".9’*o ,o p"i i3. ii’i

;4h*’llll"*,.;strnt ;iTiJt:F\ilntffi

ffiffi ffi#trfrffi

ffiffiffitril’ffiffi #ffiffi 21


.


Task Force on Potentially Hazardous

Near-Earth Objects

Tenns ofR Rationale The purpose of the Ta Force is to make proposals to HMG on horv UK should test contribute to Objects (NEOS). intemational effort on

ar-Earth

Objectives Snecifie tasks rvould be to: L Confirm the nature ofthe hazard and the Dotential levels of risk:

z. 3.

.

Identify flre current UK contribution to the international efforts; Advise HMG on what further actionto take in the light of 1 and 2 hbove and on the

commr.inication of issues to the publib.

Reporting The Task Force will report to the Director General, BNSC, by

mid-2000 on the tasks set our above

Organisation Administrative and finaircial support r.vill be provided from rvithin BNSC.

Membership Chaimran:

Dr Harry Atkinson

Menbers:

Sir Crispin Tickell Professor David Williams Richard

Tremalne-Smith BNSC (Secretary)


I

Pl99/1064

30 December 1999

ANNOUNCES TASK FORCE ON POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SCIENCE NEAR EARTH O A Task Force to look at the potential for risk posed by Near Earth Objects (NEOs)has been

w-il

r make proposals to the British National Space Centre on the nature ofthe hazard and the ial levels of It rvill also consider horv the United Kinsdom should best effort on NEOS. contribute to i The Task Force rvill be by Dr Harry Atkinson, formerly ofthe Science and Engineering Researcl.r Council (SERC)and past Chairman ofthe European Space Agency’s Council. Trvo other appointees, Sir Crispin Tickell and Professor David Williams join Dr Atkinson. Lord Sainsbury said: ’The risk ofan asteroid or comet causing substantial damage is extremely remote. This is not sonlething that people should lie arvake at rught rvorrying about, But we cannot ignore the risk, ho$’eve4 remote, and a case can be made for monitoring the situation on an

intemational

basis.

risk.

I

"Iintemational hope that the setting up ofthis Task Force rvill help the UK play a firll and prominent role in discussions on this important issue.I am delighted to be able to annouhce such a rvell. of2000."

qualified team of experts and I look forrard to receiving their report by the middle Notes to Editors: Manv NEOs have been identified and their or L Near Earth Objects either asteroids telescopes, including some of orbits determined usins in a number of countries, although remain to be survev none is believed to pose a significant risk to the Earth in the foreseeable Ofthe knosn Houever, on a ofmany millions of 1’ears, the Earth has been hit by objects of suffrcient size to cause serious damage,including the object u’hich is thought to have impacted the Earth about 65 million l.ears ago, rvith global consequences including the extinction of the

comets.

2. dinosaurs. 3.

time-scale

ftiture.

.

NASA’s.

ed.

’l

co-ordination rvith the $’ork of other NEOs.

The British National Space Centre has responsibility for agencies on the threat tq the Earth from space debris and

Dr Harry Atkinson. h New Zealander b1’ birth, has had many years of experience in dealing ivith science and technology intemationally. This has involved both intergolemrnental ororganisations (such as the ESA)and the of activities beh.veen national agencies (including NASA). He rvas attached to the Cabinet Office in the early 1970s, on the staffof the Chief Scientific Advisor, *’here his task$ included revierving all govemmental activities in environmental pollution, 4

co-ordination

Subsequenth, in the Science Research Council his responsibilities included astronomy and space. This involve.d UK co-operation rvith other countries in many spac.e science missions, and in based astronomical facifities in Australia, South Africa, Harvaii and La Palma. He helped to set up the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility at Grenoble and the EISCA Beam Reactor (ILL), also at faciliq’ in the Arctic Ciicle; and uas concemed rvith the Grenoble. Untit a l,ear fgo, he lvas Chief Scientist ofthe British insurance industry’s Loss Prevention Council. Sir Crispin Tickell hbs been Chancellor ofthe University of Ker$ since 1996 and has a distinguished diplomatic career. He sas Permanent Secretary ofthe Overseas Development I

ground-

high-flux

5,


tqso-qZ.

Agency. 1984-87, Britiih Permanent Representative to UN,1987-90. and Warden of Green College, oirora. I

Sir Crispin has played a prominent role in prcsiding, chairing and advising committees and associations on environryertal issues. These include Chairmanship of the Intemational Insiitute for Environment and development; the Climate lnstitute of Washtngton; Earth Watch (Europe) and the Advisory Committee on the Darwin Initiative for the Survival of Species since 1992. He is author ofa rvide range of envilpnmental publications. 6 Professor Darid Wilf iams holds the Penen Chair of Astronomy at Udversitlâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; College London and is President ofthe Royal Astronomical Society. He was previously Reader in Mathematics and Professor ofTheoretical Astrophysics at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and

.

ENDS


i- 9fri: \pJ’1", ,l;,*o.-rtrlT’ i"’" 1+’

Page 30

Dally ilall,

April 14,2000

by

- -- -

Glenda Gooper

24.

nightThe a quietTeaurs’ t99? had beenRescue 1tqr rcw ARCHDistlrict lhe Peak Mountain to catch were hoping hills comet, but heaw raina on DeoDle outthe the irliniose of slry and they had Cloutts obliterated gone home in disgiust. separate’ three dlsturlhg calls recelved teama suddenlv. the rescue yery a Dolice oflcer reporiing an alrcraft flying one ttomand includiii plane farmer larmer sald satd said the Plane wbrried worried crashing. One ow tf,e moors low over ed a couple red, Then repo ducked’ so low he insti[cttvely that tas an end seeing thellght crash hearlng gbw A malor up the orange lncldenf hed obvtously occurreo. Rescue moorland commonlY Mountaln htls.asmost The seven Longdendale Elbow’ controllers, lncluding bv ansometimeE areaand lrnown ’Devil’s Shaw, a$ a ball of lmmedlately appear Valley’s Philip a;d as a team8, in the hopes somettmes and disDalched theirsurvivors llght, motionless from the dancing strlng of ug:hts. of Nb efiort was spared and The Mountain Rescue Team have wreckase, people been called out endless tlmes to liours, more than f40 for searched Dlust5an hellcopter to 6nd nothing investigate onlythe averv inchRAF of moorland, mounta.ln seven are the[L ’Betweeo any Yea found of no trace was rescue teama Peak in the a reported yar one ever people see aircraft. No whocalled a by once out was that missins Dlane, Whatever it aomeone in the and assume lishts hi[s heard, had the had seen and Shaw the cdleis ip Phi trouble,’says simDlv vanlshed. No wonder, then, Rescue Controllen least that DeoDle becan to ask if t"he fabled Mountain on foreverat been ’Ttds has been gplng bomber’ Longdendale of ’phairtorir haabecome vears. no onehave t0 but Valey had retumed? so found. The reports pass poUce no longer on the reEular Lonsdendale. situated in and that between Manchestef us ess to ur of Erystery lighta sighti!8E to as referred genuine of sheffleld, is commonly sighltng a they feel tt flare.’ ’The For centuries, Haunted Valey’. red distress the Daranormal. tales of the weird and the plain supernatural this blea|(, haVe been sDun abouf, stretch of countryEide. ET HE takes the though, nieknamd withinthewhat It fausAlley’ dsle licht$ seriously, mos!lsactive ’IIFO Place experlencing after UFOpartly sightings in Nor6hern about for setf.tirne was in 1980hethem atrecals. ’It the because Europe, of ofyesq’ tNs eerie Tlrese are LoncdendAle Ushts. bY the road was along cyctlng cycllng which, in older times, snake Pssi and I saw what looked like trickerine llares on devil. whlle were the moor. top of the a on lsrce seajchlisht modem subersution has linked tlem rt wo’rtd hav Eeen about four or five a.lienlishfs spaceships. to sat there, not miles away, and orit just are also blamed for the gtting dimmen fie hish inclidence of lnexplicable plane ’r ltrrowbrighter the moors so weU. I knewgetit area world crashes in this Auring you cou.ldn’t where was in a place War nearly 50 in2 all. coulon 5o t anltway near, l[ vehicle a mind, lrave centuryspectres For the sceptJcal Also, it wasa been a cat headlight. ghostly stories oflst cotourftd ihere wasn’t far too larce. Then. stretch cloud have and close th? sky, so lt couldn’t Evenencouhters comndtted ufologist6 credulity. off a cloud. Tb been a inbeam vast majority this admit that the something I cannot dsy,lt isref,ecting

Hale-Bopp the-iight

sk-v.

-dragsing

is-in

is-a

Penni-nes

tongden-him-

ten-mile

r-oad-

’I

bl-emed

I-

a

of occurrencea have logical explanatiorL Yet such is the spoolry activity thaf ’Pennine happens in thellrst centre EuroDe’s toudstTriangle’ that UFO8 l5 due to open in devoted to conducting and scientlsts &re June experiments to t!f,haunts to understand phenomena that it,Blealrlowthe the top of Walking to than 2,000 feet above sea Moor. more is not dimcult to see how this level, reputatlon. valleyitgot its dark crags dse uPof Fbrbldding gritstone clumps sides amid on all drops, And whenBparse the wlnd heather. sllence, Barren, isand absolute thre man not hostile. natule cNuinc is firm.ly in control ofthe place Daniel ’the most deaolate, Deloe dubbedabandoDed country wild and England’.

tux

explsln.’ Not that DeoDte haven t tried. Police Doiht out that ihe r,ongdendale Moors iie between a msior intemational route for traflic apDroachingair of modng ughts. &tings mlstaken the mav have

laco-n arcing-from criss-croas

of the Holme Moss I\t of the valley, north rrnlnc tog the the arcins fromvalley and Ball ligl pylons cne as been suggested also trottom possible

bonflres’.’

undenlsblY There lsabout something thc people wreck, and ittoia unsettllng clairn wonder that local no ghost Captain have seen the of pilot, Landon P inTanner, the nying leather resplendent jacket, the ruins. wanderlngbls among that he,lil It has been augEested Longdendale saw thetowards many andthey headed them Llstrtspilots, the represented safety, than aerodrome and rather the surroundina wicked peal(a" The etheral Ughts lucker on the

th-inking

-

ilf vou look at accoutrts lgth thethem you wlllInsee centurv orasbefore, ’devil’s ’devil’s Ughts’ or desaribed he says, only astheY that you move into thisandcentury ghoats tlying saucens it become is a[ doa]rr to the culture ofthe

’It’s

time.’

to tribea avoid ohed at ntght, Celtic hoplng Brtgantes feroeioua in the hills. whooutsldrts livea ln For Michael a smallGreaves, closdoD. on the is another possible theretoqrtr of ihe v{illey,Greaves, for a sPokeEman Investlgators, GlosaopMr1838, Paranomal lvoodhead tuMel |t! 6ays: the navvles, b,y conqltlotr& waEtnbuilt app4llnglrlsh torcedveuey to live

cause. ’In

tThere h-e was a cholra epidemic’

i


,

--ls

Focus on Falrseeks

IttrccfiagF: Phll Shaw wlth dobrls from one

f6dn Debbb

,elddenceoto|e pareno|rml

of the crashed

and were buled ln travvlea ded glound. n@nsecrated that.thesouls s[tll ts thought betorrhes thelr u[qurel ould to arryingDoDle the are !asdnstedYearbY ago ’Ithat shtB ts not ln dtspute. A lntemet local traiB (a set uD a webcam onsultant the ideo crmera Elbotrr. I to on DeviluP tralnedlinted otenret) thousand

4

’It

i-ebble

wo*.’ -ltgh!.q

a Now more slte logtb&! on toa herSehtevery lsitors www.hauEtedvalley.com) ol

lay in the hope ofctrtchlng

he fs.mous lights.

alrcratt sunshlne’ lnaothefrlendlY anat the eDsultrg tlctton Pmd!!4s bustlitrc and everviblngtown seems to believe,that hard nonirdl f stodes ofghost scores the wlth setsDologlst o Musson. gurveY’Ertmg seem6 to be a who Dub trt ortbereinnscarce\Y Oeological Brltish lts resldenl wlthout ale Prsenuy savs adentlsta can be wNch allexcesa ol puzzle not earthlt8hts iDectrc of the to’Eolve of tJle usual D:ut docrn to an tlrloutgh laboratory expennenB. thes iptits behind the bar. now accept tlut ’Eclentlste earthquqxes, IPhts art seen dudtrg we need tohapP9n do ls aid now lfwhet wlrY theyEaYs and establsh earthqu&ks,’ outslde Musson.thougbt to be somethlngDr caled tribolumbescence’ giYeswnere ofi a ftict"lon between rosks mecbaplcal-anc chsrge I Psttly bul r’Ilere Dartlv cbemlcsl process, ;tttl a lot of lleldworx to Aciordhgto Debue !blr, be done.’ a lryvlousry,unxnowD maY and not excevations, says:a8 atteng Ms Randlec was cellar theexact staircase to exclttns sound’irs sPQt at the at but thisItls potentraly unearthed sDaceslrlDs, girl used to Uttle whlch the intlr6sttng. 4eans disaDpear. an extiemelY lsio,rce tuebslte, be uaed On ’i’he Haunted Valleylisted wtrictt couldPowertul iniiiiv z0 she has locatlons DainstaBltrglY ln future.’ for seDarate bY backed bdurted Place8, evewltne$ newepaper accounts or cuttings. rlneous local theatre! These lnclude therallwaY tunnel necrsnaDer churches’ and two localofnce, tale ls of the

Hl#t"-f;"td#to1"B1’h"’"T’ lt-ls

abou.nd-

’It’s

v-erv thC-re

’It

th-at

-dudng

weu-hown .uP contempo-

’Mv favourlte **ff"tH?ffi"vHflfffi&1 one of the iormaulg memller3 wlro died Fom TB" sa}’s Mrs rblr ’sbe

a colourfLtl aDDears ln the shape at the onofactors

aught’ing butter0v call, and has been flnal socurtah m8l\v tlmes t]rat a butte!try sn now Into the isParttngtonLndorporated letterhead.’ many ln GlosEoP qfe However,PLqvers’ ryrl?*ff ’’JH: rnvestlgators’ Fbranom]al Olossop who bave 30 members,conducttng fi)eno |srge amounts of time .irveatlsations’ tn haunted phces Roe auch the wherc GPI tn Mottran, Irm ctoss Greave5 Mlchael sDolesman the ghost of a have sceu clalms to wolnan called’ElizebetJr’. banged dudng tbe Clvt! sheforwasrevealhg of tbe Dosltlon Illar Robert Colonel ParltanentadaL Prhce troops to Ductenfleld’s to Mr now’ aceordlng RuDert buthaunts theandrestaurant GrCaYeB. breaklng spoons blr twistlng glasses, guch is the fervour ior the evenEaid somewhat atural thatare nrrsDelbere Dlacea to be

H.tis3’"st"*ff ldth-centurY

a-s

super-

-

wqs (on whtch the Eupermartet her gland’ to visit lbter Street. tn gurev motherbuilt) the rivsl Not suDermarEet to be outdone, iio Glossop told ’Ibsco tixat’ efter soon tocaf the Paper re$denc had tbelr osn thev. wlng man ltr chost. a d bng black coat. Eouari anArrhlle gre aI goog thcse be Eoweven tale8 to Drswopped sDlne-chflllnc everdngi oir a Hallowe’malao more have a8ndclarBe thev as vell thlnksDuroose one serlous be trasurtng: that lB Partlcularly ’Lonsdendale the PeoPle lntereatlns ao lor have done sho Uve herebecauae

too.i[ev-halred

we-should

sur-

qeneratlona and are oPen to

aiifrerent tyleE of beliel,’ he sav8. tbe mYstenes ’Tbev see in a tradttonal valeY the rcundftrc to lose ar beglruing we way c,bLh these days.

places,

not passed away aI have stitr It lsUved ilchga:otland ln folktrort. of or ln other cour atrlt cher be sould down as part becarrlle we As aluskFls o[ ttre moq,lft Shaw ctlndlDg Paths lead,8 usthe dowD thernounds and then between DeatT$r ln ftont of ua stop8. sudd,est/ I3 ttre r,!y lare wblt mounrm trge’ wrzam or as a eyes us tradltionally norntxqr.aeefr pauses, wltch,s and thm vgnlsllesltb a leaP.


Fo

Written Ansl/,’ers

t6wO377w lhy tl|tn

tforil. tbc

rc.o

of ’al) 3tl ny tn, r8e

br nl hc

ry rg al

4l

t

II

n

r)

e

f-,’k-

Mr.

Written Answers

2 MARCH 2OOO

Straw: Our estimate is that any change in the number of cases going to these courts will be de minimis. Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home DepMment ( I ) what factors underlay his estimate of (a)the cost savings that would be made and (r)the number of defendants who would be tried in the magistmtes’ courts rather than the Crown court under (i)the Criminal Justice lMode of Trial) 2)Bill and (ii) the Criminal Justice (Modeof Trial) Billl 0125281 (2)if he will provide a breakdown of the estimated savings to the criminal justice system from the Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) 2)Bill by each principal

(No.

(No.

-U

Asylum Seekers lchlmsford) Burns: To ask Secretary of for Uo’me zf ^ \; Mr. Depafiment how many asylum seekers the Chelmsford’r1t’ the

State

ttre

Borough Council area will be expected to house ftom April; and if he will make a statement. u 124931 Roche: The number and location of asylum seekers accommodated under the oational asylum support scheme throughout the country will depend on where accommodation, whether in the private or public sector, is made available to the Home Office for that purpose, on where there are existing ethnic minority comrnunities and on where there is the potential for support services to be

Mrs,

a developed. category of expenditure; and if he will make The Home Office intends to secure accornmodation I l?5331 from local authorities through Regional Consortia. Trial) Chefmsford is in the Eastern Region Strawr For the Criminal Justice (Modeof would Mr, I$(t Bill it was assumed that 12,000 fewer defendants be tried in the Crown Court annually, resulting in resource Freedom Infomation of savings to the criminal justice system of !105 million a Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for the year. For the Criminat Justice (Mode of Trial)(No.2)Bill it is assumed that 14,000 fewer defendants would be tried Home Department if he will include in the code of practice on freedom of information a provision that, where in the Crown Coun anllually, resulting in resource savlngs a request is made for information about a third party, the to the criminal justice system of f,128 million a year. holder of the information should consult the thfud pafiy gl28 savings are

statement.

Consortium.

Mr,

The mitlion estimated annual resource made up as follows:

before decidine what information is to be released and in what Lt 126161 million on committals and f,41.5 million on for the can O’Brien: I confirm tlnt this will be Crown Courl trials which would no longer take place. This would coveredMike code of practice, a working draft of which be offset by the cost of magistrates’ courls tdals (8.5 million, my rightby the Friend the Home Secretary and I hope to including dre cost of any subsequent commitlals for sentence), place in the Parliamentary Libraries shortty. and the cost (estimated dt million) of interloculory appeals to the Crcwn Court. Global Cultural Diversity Congress for the P.ison Service-saviogs of f83.5 million antually would resull flom a reduclian in remand dmes and the shortet sentences Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the imposed by magistrates’ courts. Home Department if he will place in the Library the meetings minutes of the Commission for Racial of all Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for at which the Global Cultural Diversity Congress the Home Department if it is his policy that appeals to the Equality were Crown Court against magistrates’ decisions as to mode of and Global Cultural Diversity Congress 2000 11126821 trial under the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Mode of Tdal) 2)Bill should be heard (1)by circuit judges Mike O’Brien; Disclosure of minutes of onty; and if he will make a statement; tl125361 meetifgs of the Comrnission for Racial Equality is a matter for the Commission. (2) open coun; and if he will make a Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the lll2529l Home Department if he will make a statement oo the Straw: The intention is that the appeal should be involvement of the Home Office Race Equality Unit in heard by the Resident Judge or by a deputy nominated by the Global Cultural Diversity Congress and the relationship the senior presiding Judge. The Govemment believe that between the Unit and Global Cultural Diversity Congress basis of the 2000 most appeals will be determined onthetheparties I r27r6] papers. It would however be open to judge to seek head the unit attended on The of Mike O’Brien: could agree my behalf at two meetings of the Intemational Steering to make oral rcpresentations, which the hear if he considered it necessary in the ioterests of Committee to provided The names of the Congress. Unit of justice; the arrangements for such an oral hearing would possible speakers and suggested topics for workshops. be a matter for the judge’s discretion. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for Home Department if he will list the persons who wrote the Home Department what estimate he has made of the messages of support in the Global Cultural Diversity length of the average waiting time for a trial in a Congrcss registration brochure published by the megishates court if the Criminal Justice (Modeof Trial) Commission for Racial Equality, indicating in each 2)BiU is enacted. [112517] case when they were first informed that the Global by deal with over Cultural Diversity Congress had been cancelled,lland Straw: The magistrates’ courts 12’7261 400,000 cases annually and will have no Mike O’Bden: These are matters for the company difnculty in absorbing the additional cases which it is and the Commission for Racial Equality. expected that they will retain as a result of the

form.

couns-12.5

Mr,

0.5

hon.

Mr.

discussed. No. Mr.

(No. in statement.

r-_

Mr.

Mr.

Ltd.

Mr,

Mr.

(No.

Mr. either-way

Bill.

whom. Mr.

Ltd.


From: IO: Snt: Subjec’t: Your message

-

AA1/USofS(Petsonal) on behalf of USofS/Mailbox sEc(AS)2 18 November 1999 17:55 Read: ’UFOs’ reque.st for briefing

Usofs/Mailbox To: ffice; Cc: SoF$Priv’ate DCqRAD; N6,vs of /t\tlB(MD; ’UFOS’ request br briefing Subiect; Sent: rBlLUgB rTAl

was read on 18/1U99 17:55.

RAF; Hd

MIN(AD-REGISTRY

GROUP MAIL; Ps/znd FUS; DAO;D DCC(RAD SIO; Hd of DR;Hd of DRl

MIN(DP)/REGISTRY GROUP MAIL;

D

Ne,’s; D FnPol;


From:

To: Sent: Subject: Your message

-

SOFS-Registry1 on behalf of SOFS-Private Ofiice sEqAs)2 18 November 1999 17:49

Read: ’UFOs’

reque.st for briefing

Usofs/Mailbox To: Office; MIN(DP)/REGISIRY GROUP MAIti MIN(AD-REGISTRY GROUP MAIL; PS/2nd PIJS; DAO;D News; D FinPol; Cc: SOE-Pri\te DCC(MD; D Ne!$ RAF; of ,$|B(RAD; DCC(mry 516 1,6 ot oR; of DR1 ’UFOS’ request for briefing Subjech sent; Igllv99 r7i4L Hd

was read on L8l1U99 L7149.

Hd


3.Routine. Background

4.

Earlier this week the ly’ervs of the World and Daily Mail ran speculative articles on the early release of MOD ’UFO’ There is no substance to the articles. Files are routinely released to the Public Record Offrce under the rule and MOD ’UFO’files from 1969 will be made available Januarv.

files.

i-n

5.

30-year

Public interest in ’UFOs’and science fiction related issues (alien abduction,

rnimal mutilation, crop circles etc) has grown rapidly in recent years fuelled by films, TV programmes, books and media axticles purporting to relate actual experiences or reconstruct alleged ’LJFO’ sightings. This in tum has prompted a small but vocifercus number of ’ufologists’ to demand MOD investigates all sighting reports whether or any defenc+related interest has been reported. All attempts to explain MOD’s limited interest are met with scepticism and" where these explanations do not accord with the inquirer’s own views or interpretations, allegations of a or that information is held on secret files are No amount of reasoned explanation will convince The absence of substantiated information does not deter some journalists from filing frctitious articles illustrated with pictures.

cover-up

made.

tlern.

eye-catching

Briefing Options

6.

USofS’s name has already been quoted in highly speculative newspaper articles. If Minister was now to grart even a single joumalist an interview about ’UFOs’it would


Presentational Aspects

9.media.

The routine release of MOD

â&#x20AC;&#x2122;UFOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;files in January will be of further i:rterest the

Any briefing of a j oumalist will add to this interest. It is therefore likely that Ministerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s neme will continue to be reported in connection with this subject unless the Departmort does all it can to prevent As a first step, the Departrnent in their dealings with the media should stop repeating his name; use of the press line at para 4 [sic] ofthe reference should be discontinued immediately. The lines provided in the News Brief (D/Sec(AS)64l1 of 15 Nov), should continue to be Inthe event Minister approves a briefing by officials, additional lines to take as necessary rvill be orovided nearer the time.

it.

used.


o ’ I

Loose Minute D/Sec(AS/64ll 8 September 1999 APS/USofS

Copy to:

AO/ADI

l.

ISSUE

To provide anote on the Departrnent’s interest in RECOMMENDATION To note.

,UFOs,.

2.

DETAIL Policy

G*fqent policy that any air defence or air implications of .UFOs, ]:areI]a 1matter for MOD and the. Civil Aviation Authorirytraffrc (CAA)iespectively. MOD,s

!19rest is limited to establishing from any reponea siitrii"gs it receives whether the Region by activiry, and respondng to any associated publicbreached correspondence. Military Task 9 is to maintain the integrity of the airspace. This requirement air (rad*) iir poricing Any &reat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled in rh; hght ;f rhe panicular circumstances at the time (ii rnight, appropriate, involve the scrambling or divasion of RAF air defeni if deaned penpective, repors froiitirit sent to us of sightings are examined" but consultation with is considered only where there is suffrcient evidence UK air.space: such as reports from credible wimesses (pilots, to suggest a those supponed by photographic, video or docurientary bf a number of wiuresses; or are of a phenomenon cunenrlyevidence; being be capable of detection. Only a handtul oireporis Tight,intherefore, recent years in these categories and firther investigation of mem nas tound no evidence ofa threat. Airprox Reports

$|i1P:l**

has_been

hostif"-rifit’"ry

4’

uK’s 1;1.T,|1$:::"*]o]: yqg’sed pi-cture ;A;

’uFo’

:::::i"iT.*:*y :::Tl:t ::1T:,^,::.."J’ :,"f:::*T*0.:T:t",t .:?:T":"".:"ed T:-To

aircraftl-

caJility.

aiia"r*.. sLff*a ai.traifi-’c’

to-

or civilian pilot considen that his aircraft has been endangered by l;^Paq:,1,"t,0:ary tne proxmity of another aircraft (including any flying object he was unable


o

or in regulated airspace where an Air Trafic controiler believes there has l1*tiyi been the risk of a colrision, the pilot or ATC would be ourig"a to file an airmiss repon

(Airprox).

6.Programme. we

The Department ofTrade and Indusby is responsible for the Spaceguard understand that there to set up a national the potential threat of impact Uy neiieant oU;ects (such as rs,taken very seriously but they regard this as an issue where a common is essential. In June, the House oflords debated the ljlllluuonl*rpproach spaceguard Programme;Lord Saimbury, Minister for Science at the DTI, led the debate for the Govefiment.

arecunelit;;;il

: :-:iTJ

ll,il*Ld^"::"cy;

.

focat point within MOD for the Govemment,s limited interest in l;J::!Oa]1:,"e \Jr..ls A z+-nowsighting answerohone is provided so that members ofthe public can ieports.centres i.ponsor themadecivilian elsewhere, either to military It:OJ::tP"+ a* traffic control police, all eventually make ::?,o11**lr, where each report is considered only to establish whether it has !o s.eces)2 TLY:y r^tgnltrcance. Some 230 reports and 250 letters were received lrs.not ^li$r-{ y.ar;constituted so rar th* year c 150 reportssighting and 160 leners have received. sec(AS)2 as a ’uFo’information bureau. There arebeen defence resources al-locared for this purpose and, where tbere is no evidencel no of defence concem’ no action is taken to ry and identifo what might havea report been seen. From the 9:.riplions.generally ieceived,aircraft o, pn"r"i."fi;"b1y

-":l*". H:.:.f p-. lot.

account tor most ofthe observations.

"il*J

*-

ufologisa’are unhappy with MOD’s limited inrerest. A small number roooy. vocuerously for defence funds to be used for ’LrFo’ research, have their own

rvti"irio, purlo. i "i. ai*r.trt. pri." All such

aganda for such work and use all possible avenues 1e!Gting to other Govemment Depanmena, tire media etc) to approaches find their way to MOD, Sec(AS;for action.

’UFO’Files

9’^ ,.+s is 1!e case with other Government files, MoD rrles are subject to the provisions ofthe Public Records Act of l95g and 1967 and official files generally ranain crosed for 30 years. Prior to 1967 it was the case that were destroyed after five as there was insufficient interest in the subject tofrles warant their retention. since 1967 files have been routinely released to the Public Record Office at the point. For some time, Lord Hill Norton, the only paliamentarian with any interest in ht been that all files containing ’{JFo’ iniormatiou be released to the r|l(J,aneao ot the asking 3Gyear We have looked carefully to see whether this is However’ Posslole’ the absence of a Deparunental-wide file database and without in Knowlng the details ofall the originating branches, a manual search of in excess of one million files at two main MOD archives would be uecessary ro locate and list

y-ears

Io.Y.t"g’

.10.^ui9l"

all.uFo’3O_year point.

’uFo’

ire.",.,ed *o


*

*

*

*

*

.

seen.

’UFOs’. 24-hour reporu.

RAF-related

I

SI]BSIDIARY POINTS Mlitary Task 9 is to maintain the integrity of the UK’s airspace. This requirement is ma by the continuous recognised air picture (radar)and an air policiag capability. Any threat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled in the light of the particulr circumstances at tle time (it nigh! if deemed appropriatg involve the scrambling or diversion ofRAF air defence aircraft). Alleged sightings sent to us are examined, but consultation with air defence staff and others as necessary is considered only where there is suffrcient evidence to suggest a b’reach of UK air space. Only a handful of reports have been received in recent years that warranted any firther investigation and no evidence was found of any tbreat. Where there is no evidence in a report of defence concern, no action is taken to try and identi! what might have been From the types ofdesc:riptions generally received aircraft or natural phenomena probably account for most of the observations Sec(AS)2 is the Air Staff Secretariat. It deals with a wide range of issues. It also acts as the focal point within MOD for the Government’s limited interest in A answerphone is provided so that members of the public can telephone tbrough sighting Reports made elsewhere, either to military establishments, air traffic control centres or the civilian police are forwarded to Sec(AS)2. Some 230 sighting reports and 250 letters were received last year Where a military or civilian pilot considers his aircraft has begn en,langered by the proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object he is unable to identiff), or in regulated ainpace where an Air Traffic Conholler believes there has been the risk of a collision, the pilot or ATC would be obliged to file an afumiss report (Airprox).


o

s.st.* HE

sa

E$EEgE

ffiH

lEillt. EEEEffii

,"g$HEF

-fr

gtl

c,fl rEl ?l

6a

ffi


NEWS OF THE WORLO, Novembor’14, 1999 7

KIDI{AP ERROR at mFtory cont o olromar a ld*

YOUNG

the scars nlght aftf t latvan 3ne waa

Into vfa! found abaal

d,.ggg.d

Two mon had earllor ho?

a gaaaga Iatacro$ Rrddlrg, Borkr,

ths ruabhout

Sho waa vlclourly boden d thrown lrtto tho A wltnoss told pollco thc

van.

3ul-

woman, aged aboui 20, lered laclal lnlurle3.

SoDerlntendont Detective Trcvor Davleg 3ald: are

"We e,(tremely worrled. thls lftoitch get woman can In wlth us she ehould." A tgam ot dolectlvs were g to ldentlfy the eoman scoufing mlishg peFon

:s.thepolice. The garage has

CCTV tootage

by

been

Chu,19,26, l,l:L r.iPd ro $ay? ftis ntr. I/,\tt"tl.’i,,(iluuxht t):iTiI! lSit-t. London Jore (;hifts?4 rhwt in thPas ’s.dinq l|ePk,! i(;1.!i ltrot!i.:e i,’,r and

-

Braatl--

THE truth about whether

fn0DEt

Xde--

iens have ever vasited ain is to be revealed at last. BY lAN KIRBY L )ilil( l^l ( (’[ll :;l’( )r’]l)[NT government Toponsecret the Ul’O took off at n incredible 8ate. ’spac thousands Files of Butarthestillfacts aboul most later GANG of Role,( robbe.s ship’ riddles will be opened speed. mysteries locked away. ced on Andrea Foulks. the truth about clainrs include cftannel up to public gaze by Defence by’fhey QvCasSftopplng former delcncc chief Lord shehours. Darked he. Minister Peter Kilfoyle. ’rdn that RAF Feltwell in Srrtfolk uses car in the early They will includ photos and its sprce age radar, built by the US Air

ROBBED 2g-yee..old wasTlre one man whilothe

blonde

grabbed by throat another hy snatched t2,5O0 Catlle. watch ald a ,200 ngcklace, Tho the’ f,ung fter to the end ofr ln e cart30O $rtlh ber beg in rhe attackers. sald to be andAndrea black in thelr pulled up slruck as in Sloene Scoaae. Londor.

he.

203.

-blolt’-up4nd

spotzig-zags year.

man colldpsed inrldea discorered

dum y usad to IooI eaFjackea.

pur-

RDER

BABY ight-week4ld in his

was boyhome by a Irenrled Police tound little B.adley being cradled ty his mother. He died tour trom In hospital lad in,u Th tot s murn Samantha brolhe. andal6o )pher, five, head at the twcbedIn the house In Mertlryr lydfl, Wales.

es.

20.Inlu.lB sufcoun"l

Nelghbour sald: ,qannettc heard aod aa i lroygc.eaming cryln8. Samadh.

covambulance."

out with her lace ln blood and was taken

A

26-yea.-old

ln an man pollce at the andbywds blng quqg

yeeteday.

ialncergie--theocover-up. Crank preSechush-hush investi-

Fe-

COPS smashed into Llon6,z aFrance, car loih rescue

-

l_orce,

tails of every UFO investigation in to track UFOS. the past :|0 years. Every year, around He quizzed fiinisters about the bare. 300 alien sightingi are reported. by military.experls Ior action the evenl of an alien inPlans ot Londor will invasion be unveiled. also The Jiles. s.orcd i ! b ontb p r ool b nucleur deep belou ket The Yanks recently haU.lhree should be rcIeased leased a reoort of the in’lhc months.patt of 3 nororious R;swell nlove. 194?. which dent in in lo SIGHTED: Flying saucer aiien corpses governnrcnl were eno Lrnnecessafy seen secret al s edly 10 send crecy. sure is New Mexico air base. a UFO spotlers the xplained They frenzy. They willinlo hope "bodies were dummies to learn secrcts about: secret weather from a MASS|VE craft aA ballooh, UFO ledBritain’B flying inNolth Sea rists siillbut otf has been e believe there The laBt coast 900ft UFO shot off at l?.000mph sued bv two when fiqhterselven iels. Brilain’$ aclAlils thit pared byfiles th wereMoD’6 In UFOs hsve crashed Aircraft set up to Britain retariat,UFOS. War sinc World DUMMY: Rodr,vell’ali6n’ gate Ahazihgly, OSIGHII GS of a boss Nick its Pope believes HE was three-legged lar du;ted inbyFlorida. aliens while ship in Rendlesham dliving est. Suffolk. in 1980. Ile kept mum tuhile in his job le of being Iabe[ed a cnnk. US airmen fronl lwo But after leaving lhe nesrby t ases claim out wrol thea secret he unil, object rose hoveringthen bestsellers series of incidents. alien "My ofblsstdtheinto space al an RIDDLE: Space invader ibout He convinced said; experi ences me lhal RAF incredible sDeed. a resl and threalening ofI lhe area. bul UFOS are we investisato.s_cordoncd a|’e nol alonc. nomenon, closelr their’ Jindings are a still quarded scret, MoD hrrs heard of "Since UFO EightinEs, though that’s Some details of UFo sightings in the 9.000only the tip of the iceberg. has Fiftie6 and Sixties hsv alteady been ably Defence Minister Mr Kilfovle publictounder madeaooled a carlful colleagues that. after Rule sensitivelhedocuments. told view of the files. he is’not convinced" them is the Iotnous tg62 Among about the existefce o[ aliens. people dent in which Anne Heston he wanls to But MoD slall say thefu \ras st totn to sec;ecyobiecl olter she rcpoited lo make uD own ere o( out be oble shooling seeing a green said:’"These files source het home huge red abore A aad Somersel. flomes a public paiht They inleresl. ifl Tarnton, picture UFO reporls natinginvestigated-shd oI how Ten years earlier, RAFa FIight whst would hap $,ere shining obiect ent John Kilburna 6aw did land in in the sky above west Yorkstoair base. Den if aliensOueverviev: Page 22 when iets werq scrambled

- .lrivewhite-un-

m*caeh. con-

rcun.t

Hil -Nor-

I - tliangu-space-ForHover

one-time

lo.

trees.

l )5$- .he

16-war’old slor-like

Thirty-Year

inci-

Lieutn-

investi-

ab-

phe-

prob-

re-

’n.inds. fasci-

Britsin.-


d

H

6

E

E7

oE

H! ?E gj 5a ! H q aE >E c e a,

;:ti,fil

o

o g

I

o

.5 o Xl;F:riitEi;SiE i it >HtEd* E’* 15’iS: l s x ,,tt gai.H E[;::r HrE * l!5 o ?grE:i:i i;riE;fsr5FgEi; Eg=*nE :5 E}:i ’ e o,’E j HiE !:?3 qI .,I5 at u E6Z i;i;sifib;’:e’ sq: ’5E.s’ ;5+E.:

).s- ’. -’ 93l

tri

=<_

]

3E 9,E

6

E

Co

=.8 >2..:U r;5;c’o 3d.._ iffiff# 5E ’ Eb sC #;:#iff$;i;;ffiiE s

r6 =q ?t ki& ’rc? 9tr E6 Eg 3: Exi 5:

!E

-s

uffgtfftr#$

-’E"ii$;eE-Eg_l:-t="i=

E

iilE:i;iiFgitrEiigEs

E3

t*s’d+ !itst; 3E:;:s ;E:E;E .S:Cs .EE ; Fgg:E ;*;tE:Ei;

IE

.9u

3ffiffi

&g

E

d-s ’ s"’6. *.3gl:EI;i:’c t:"Eg6;,*b g’e ia

c)

b

E

E

oO

$

3

I

- --’: :--g"F*E;o-’ -

o L ! 2f .ggEs c.9 Ei&. .=:= o g;*d-q ;;s ::HbFF3 a 4 i , i i;; i a Eri,6.’3f=:3* -’r"!fi:6.9 I . : iE#i5" i slEl :EtfiiE eF rd:3.8O-!Ftr o ’’0etrs$’F6t ’nIE ; tEb9.^^t cl i tt =ui* HF;;* EdIr E

?

-

E

.-_

E s;;EEFielEsii?j:

c:f EEqE;Ei*’E:E o iiffiiffiFffiii:i iEEE:#{tEi:giEE; 0. i; :.E*; JE tg E:.;EeEErE i:i;9E* giE$et"ii ::eF& E J,E;:;.Erio;si51l:iE r iii :,L i*i=;eB

oE

ul

(

i dE*E

lEE f i

g

E

E

I\

rE

e

Fi I


Cc:

Sr-.c(*]t , ilc.,r:ZAf)

REGIONAT

Daily Post, Monday, November 15, 1999

pledge price low Ford broke that claims Probe into Fire evacuation interests to competitlon conaumer promise matters from has knocked Ford making the Since giant Ford is facing a Government were evacuated Ford Focus cars, origi’ between car firms. oII piice promise inquiry custom-

CAR HOUSEHOLDERS to yesterday alter a fire at a woodyard into allesations it has broken a ers over prlces.the company has saved tzm by fail’ in Craven street, Birkenhead. Firelighters evacuated household’at It istoclaimed surrounding streets ing keep a pledge made to buyers of its Ford ers from while they tackled the blaze Focus model in September’customers who bought a 1.45pm The comDanv Dromised at Sutton’s woodlark. and the end of the needed to Ford Focu; beiween Sep(ember Three fire crews were the that if it iater cut (he price of the they although the extinguish would be reimbursed the d ifference. cause is not yet known,

fire,

vear.

car’

of 2,000 Xl,000 the nade no refunds to nally priced at tI3,005, butthehashigherprlce. bought at customers whoAllairs has Minister Dr KimofHowells consurner Trade and ordered ofTicials at the Departrnent case. Industry to investjgate the A sDokcswornan for the DTI said a number of officials would be involved in the dillerint gation as it could have implications on a range of

investi-

wit.t

also call on the Advertising Dr Howells Authot ity lo invesugate whether Ford Sta[dards published any misleading advertising relating to the offer. the ctaim it had broken its But Ford dismissed the cars sold at a lower prjce lvet’c orornise. 6ld, rrnsoldsavine stoik and so the cut was not a pl’ice reduction across the range,

I


TI{E SUN 161t1/99

-

-

.and fragTHREE IY|oI{TI|SI srar-like red. wirh olien invqsion flt{ fuslT(IUTD be omong BriloinonGovernment rould docu’ secrel tion ierelanded. f;undlevels-whereradiaFslien rr{D unveiled in TY(}U menls be cralt had lo said: idvasion. He mass ar nws avoid the to Pa[ic jj’"d5"h.:",T;th lhrae months.

By MARTIN PHILLIPS I frtlllTARY plons to deol of

red exploded yellow lights movirgthey before q’hite lisht. into three menrb An ofollicer relorted the sky which ssvobjects off inPren blue lietrts. Hieh of and

(luT,o L’,iJ,i"8, c o. d o . failed. ’In .announce. ’The ;::"’"n:".f ’sound. g’J-’l;8 be-fore -What- -ths job. inforrna_ public. miod-:1, , -: ’ :":",1;l o F."""?t rr?""x-il"l ",i03 f r o m B?3’l;:"fl o PoDe. Airoort’. air- *"*’1:?.3t Jilo’ tdan-nearinvestigat-leTachte- vear,But, phenom-satel- ioi.t f l v object. investi- cular- lumbo-i;t rcsolution.Child.novsl. r- il.lo. ";::;f

for writing the reasonthought oI lothefocus whether totfattsck and creatures the soace letwith readyin to Milister lse "Part itwhatwss all there linegreeter be out6rethere truth we should edds: "Until He policy of there La6our’s view, New tny He adds: lo woulo DeI should was anything plan be a contlngency suppos PeoPle don’t haFpened something documnts and so that if Photos told anyihing. wouldwas be prepared." inveEtiealion of UFO "But es 6ootr as the situation weNick cover scDticel about siqbtinEs over last 50 Yesrsto becam 6afest thing UFOs when he blgan his the the omole would b clear to make how tion Fileslike is deal knoweuthorities fro’m iheDlanned xwould Here arehis fiv cases that would have to chaneed It to the positive." and trirhful eny alien landingsfor thtee beNick wiih there 200 to are saYs Nickheaded tho whoMinistrv of 300 atleg;C UFO sightings a Forest, nea! the vears Ninty Pef cent ar Rendlesham and Aherican depsrtment befence bt nttural axptalned woodbridge, Sulfolk, at atBrirish saYs: base siehtings, UFO Ing lights, ena ltke aircrsft I98o. Chrlslmas thing ithportant lorflnd out lites, rneteors and airshiPs. tnost Day, two At 2am on be iowhat ers wouldwre, the others Dattolmen a lerge metallic sawBoxing theya remaan aalarmingl!, aliens who1othedaand mysterl. nights Two iriengular to try to lind i/snted, team *;f OPeration Nick’s new predicts Deacful wha! lster, a mllitary v/ould then Thunder hsvfhetoCovertlment decide how lo telease would heDDen in the vent ol E3l**inil^’le6 INDEPENDENT

_

-

"l;I rSI’|b I

Peiwone .*il"-*iTHtr.;l’13?".il:1"’l""qiT.’"’,’,H""lu’* o-bjects’ white-*^ worldwid,2{ffi;;1,i#;:;;il;’ m’utl,’"z’k i . f i ; f5* liiitr’ili,iliiiil’n j,i"ii:ii"i*!’" il’lliii#i’ii’"’iiliJi.*li.e,l.Tff :i;lIi1’.’. 16/r1199

pandora@indePendent’co’uk

TREK a

ffi;#[

ti"uiiili,

1990. North Sea in November No explanation for the sighting was ever Drovided. O 11"3lets over tbe Nonh Sea fishter ii took off at l?,0oomph, 20 times the sDeed oI vards their Dlan iv{anchester Th ebove but miss was iniestigsted never explalned, Omaxed with reDorts oldn’51"1’il s siz atUFO Cosfoid ine RAf bases anA ov6r shrooshire. Shawburv.

sprencal sPhericarobjsctsa:f:some ratber worrvns objects colouredbvspherical spotted an easre’eved

12

Tnon’.tirr Chtl4 pubnshed by Operatlon Schult

brtc.


!,

h

/h!.5 rr ufodata6{,rul U.ff’c a^ .Aqrr \ i\^ r,:, i,f^ lil{o

--

r)

$,t.’ ,/.’^ )eoJ ,ok6q,.r-i \

UNIDENTIFTED FLYING OBJECTS FILES IDENTIFIED AS TOCETHER WITH SCHEDULED RELEASE DATES AS AT

Already open

To be released: 2000 2001 2002 2003

2

l4 l3

2004 2005 2006

-

Total awaiting release

I I 55

Total identified (released/unreleased)

C|_ASSES:

-

t03

RECORDS CREATED OR |NHER|TED BY THE AIR MINISTRY AND SUCCESSOR. THE ROYAL AIR FORCE. AND RETATED BODIES

AIB

AIR 2 AIR MINISTRY: RECISTERED FILES

’15918

1961-63

UFO’5: sightings; reports by members ofthe public. Extracts subsequently releasedl

form. I 73t 8 1953 ditto [File originally released in a sanitised form. Extracts subsequently released] 17526 1964 UFO files. [File originally released in a sanitised form. Extracts subsequently released] ditto 17527 ’1965 ditto

AF/X59/64 ft 5

File originatly released in a sanitised

1965-66 I966 1966-67 15 7 1967-68

17982

--

ditto 7983 117527,179a2 and | 7983 OPEN released 19971 ditto 17944 1 81 1967 Unidentified flylng objects: reports

|

-

968-69

8564

1957-71

I 81 {1 1

16 I 967

ditto

7984,l8l l 5 and | 81 1 5 OPEN released 19981

81 1

ditto

IoPEN released 1999t

l8183 I

Unidentified flying objects

AF/X59/64 Pt 6 AF lX59164 ft 7

AFlXs9/64 Pt 8 AF/X59/64 Pt 9 AF/X59/64 Pt l0

AF/Xs9/64 Pr t I AF/CX38/67 Pt I AF lCXlAl6T ft 2 AF/CX38/57 Pt 3 AF J7463172 Pt 2

IDue for release 2000] |

UFO Reports: West Freugh 1957

I This list has been complled

on an ad ho basis and is not intended to represent a complete lists of ufo, ufo related

papers preserved at the PRO,


ufodata

970-71

UFO Reports 18565 I 118554 and 18555 due for releas 2OO2l

t

883’l 1972

UFO repons

AF 17 463 17 2

UFO reports

AF 17464172

lDue for release 20031

1972-73 18833 1973-74 for

lAA32

-_ --

IDue for release 2004] [Due

UFO reports

AF 17464172

release 2Oo5]

reports no.to be1974-75 allocated. Due for release

18874 lPiece

fttl

AF 17464172

UFO

2006]

AIR 14 BOMBER COMMAND

.

2800 1 943 No I l5 Squadron: news sheet "Bang On" No I

IOPEN-releasedl9T2l

AIR I6 FICHTFR COMMAND

’| 199 1952 Sept Flylng saucers: occurrence reports: service personnel at Topcliffe statlon, Thirsk and local public sector

||Hr /r 88/r /r 7

loPENl

AIR 20 UNRECISTERED PAPERS

l950-54

Unidentified aircraft (flying objects): reports 7390 9320 1957 Parliamentarv question on UFOs ditto 9321 I 957 ditto 9322 1957 Reports on aerial phenomena 9994

1953-57 1612 1967-58 694 Jan

--

17390,9320 9322 and 9994 OPENI I I 968 II I 1695 1968 I I696 1968

Unidentified flying objects ditto

Feb

Dec

--

ditto ditto

IPieces |1612,I1594 I 1696 OPEN released I9991 1

I

887 1967 Aug

Sept Oct 1967

I I 888 1967 I I 889 1967 1 1

I 1894 ’1968 Mar 1895 I 968 Apr

I

’| 1896 1958 May

lt 2713l4a MR 008514/ 193

t\4R0086t4/213 4/220

t\4R 0086 |

rHl273 /tO l4 MR 073414

AF/s4f(Air)S l

2

AF/s4(Air)5I3 AF/54f(Alr)523

ditto ditto ditto ditto dltto ditto ditto

AF/s4f(Air)s07 AF/s4f(Air)so8

ditto ditto ditto

AF/S4f(Alr)514 AF/S4f(Alr)515

890 oct 891 1967 Nov 1 I 892 1967 Nov I 1 893 1967 Dec n 1887 | 1893 oPEN released 19981 iI

I

AF/54f(Ai0s09

AF/54f(Ar0so9 AF/s4fiAir)s10 AF/S4f(Air)51 0 AF/S4f(Air)51 I

AF/s4f(Air)516


--

ufodata

I I 897 I 968 Jun I 1I 1I II II 1

898 I 968 Jul 899 l96E Auq 9OO 1968 Sept 9Ol 1968 oct 902 1968 Nov

n 1894

I l9O2 OPEN

12055 l959]an 12056 1969 Feb 12057 1969 Mar 12058 1969 Apr ’12059

1969 May ’12060 l969Jun 12061 1969Jul ’12062 1969 Aug

dttto ditto datto ditto ditto ditto

released 19991 ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto dltto ditto ditto ditto ditto difto

12063 1969 Sept 1969 oct 12064.|969 12065 Nov ’12066 1969 Dec 11205 5 1 2066 due for release 2OOOI ditto 12067 ’1970 Jan I 2297 1970 Feb ditto I 2298 1970 Mar dltto I ?299 1970 Apr ditto ’| 2300 1970 May ditto I 2301 I 970 June ditto ditto I 2302 I 970 July I 2303 1970 Aug ditto 1 2304 1970 Sept ditto 1 2305 1970 Oct ditto I 2306 1970 Nov ditto tl2067,| 2297 12306 due for release 2o0l l UFo repons 12399

1971-72 Jan l24Ol Feb 12402 Mar.h 12403 April

1

24OO 1972

1972 1972 1972 12404 1972 I 2405 1972 12406 1972 12407 1972 I2408 1972 12409| 972 | 972 12410 ’f 241 1972 Dec

May

June luly

Aug Sept Oct

Nov

ll

ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto ditto

I ’l for relase 2399-l241 due

12544 l971Jan 12545 | 973 Feb 12545 | 973 lvlar

ditto ditto dltto

AF/S4f(Air)5I7 AF/s4f(Air)5I I AF/S4f(Air)519

AFl54f(Air)s2o AF/s4f(Air)521

AF/s4(Air)s22 AF/S4f(Alr)524

AF/s4f(Air)52s AF /54 f(Ai r) 5 2 6 AF lS4flAit)527

AF/S4f(Air)528 AF/S4f(Air)529 AF/54f(Air)530

AF/s4(Air)53 | AF /s4 f(Air)s 3 2

AF/s4(Air)s33 AF/s4f(Air)s34 AF/54f(Air)535

AF/S4f(Alr)536 AF/S4f(AtR)53 7 & rD/48/94

AFls4f(ArR)s38 & rD/48/9s AF/54f(ArR)539 & rD/48/96 AF/S4f(ArR)s40 & rD/48/97 AF/S4f(/AlR)541 & lD/48/98 AF/S4f(ArR)s42 & rD/48/99 AF/S4f(AlR)s43 & rD/48/r O0 AF/S4f(ArR)s44 & tD/48i rOr AF/S4f(ArR)545 & tD/48/i 02 AF/S4f(ArR)546 & tD/48/i03 lD 147 J274 Pt 4 tD l4al117

rD/48/ r r 8

lD l4all t 9 tD 148 J120

tD J481121 tD 1481122 tD 1481123

tDl48l124 lD l48l125 lD J481126 tD 148lt 27

tD l4al128

2OO3l

tD 148 t129 rD/48/ r 30 rD/48/ | 3 |


ufodata

-- _

12547 1973 Apt ditto 2548 1973 May ditto dltto 12549 1973 ditto I 2550 1973 Jul I 2551 I 973 Aug ditto I 2552 1973 Sep ditto 1 2553 1973 ditto I 2554 973 ditto I 2555 1973 ditto IPieces l2 544 I 2555 due for release 2OO4l 1

|

-

Jun

tD l4a lt34

rD/48/ l3 s tD t48t136 tD l4a 1137 tD/48/r 38 rD/48/ r 39

oct Nov Dec

AIR 22 PERIODICAL RETURNS, SUMMARIES AND BULLETINS

93 1955 Air Ministry Secret Summary. Vol. 10, No 3 Article on Flying released 19861

IOPEN

tD l48l t 32 tD 1481133

tD 148l t 40

Saucers.

llc/lol

EI CLASSES RECORDS 0E THE METEOROLOGICAL OFFICE

--

BJ5 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS

1968-70

UfO: Met aspects 3l I lDue for release 2ool I

AFlM 396 /68

DEFE CLASSES: RECORDS CREATED Q8 INHERITED BY THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE. CHIEFS OF STAFF COMMITTEE AND RELATED BODIES DEFE I

O DIRECTORATE OF SCIENTIFIC INTELLICENCE ANDJOINT TECHNICAL INTELLICENCE COMMITTEE

496 1950 Apr l95l Dec Minutes of meetings 497 952 Jan I 954 Oct Minutes of meetings |

1496 and 497 oPEN

releasd

|

9981

DEFE 3l DEFENCE INTELUGENCE STAFF:REGISTERED FILES

958-63 963-67

’l UFO: policy ’l UFO: Policy ll l8 and I l9 oPEN released 19981 I I

l8 l9

- -- - -

Dr/ssi 40/9/r Ptr Dtlss l40l9 /t Ptz

DEFE 4l FOREICN OFFICE AND MINISTRY OF DEFENCE: SCIENTIFIc AND TECHNICAL INTELLICENCE BRANCH AND OVERSEAS LIAISON BRANCH: REGISTERED FILES

74 ’1950 DSI/JTIC: minutes 75 l95l DSI/JTIC: minutes DSI/JTIC: minutes 76

1952-54released

[74 76 OPEN

117 i

949-50

1996]

Unonhodox Aircraft

(lncludes UFO references, but limited to British and Cerman press cuttings)

153

1953-54

DSI/JTIC

papers t,

Vol. 4 Vol. Vol. 901 7/8 Vol. i Dlgi Vol.s

6005 /8/D l7 6005 /8/D l7 6005 /8/D l7

(lncludes a list, as at August t 95 of all repons issued Dsl/Jllc No 7 Unidentified Flying Objects’) n | 7 and I 53 OPEN released 19951

5 6


- -

ufodata

Annex B

PRO CLASSES CREATED FOR INTELLICENCE RECORDS UFO RETATED RECORDS AS AT October

r 998

--|- - - - -- -

classes have, to date, been identified for records created for the defence "intelligence" branches. They contain between them more than | 5,750 Intelligence records selected for permanent preservation. The classes together with the date range and approximate number of pieces in each class: RESARCH WARNINC. A COMPREHENSIW SURCH FOR UFO REIATED DOCUMENTANON HA’ NOT BEEN CONDUCTED. iI

IDENTIFIUNON OF RELEUANT RECORDS IIAS BEEN ON THE tsEST CUESS" PRINCIPLE.

ADM 223 Naval Intelligence Papers, ADM 23

l9’l4-1955,

Naval Intelligence Reports,

840 liles and

volumes.

1883-1965, 54 volumes

’1926-

1963, 2706 files and volumes Directorate of Intelligence and other Intelligence Papers DEFE I o Major Committees: minutes and papers 504 bound volumes.

AIR 40

1942-1576,

DEFE l0/496) These two pieces contain 7

497)

report.

[6items were released

items relating to Working Party on Flying Saucers and its subsequent

In l.:Lgo see DEFE 4l

174-761

(496 & 497 RELEASED I 998) DEFE

2’l

DEFE 3l

Joint Intelllgence Bureau, Directorate of Scientific Intelligence: Registered fi les

Defence Intelligence Staff: Registered files

||

1958-63 lt9l963-67) (tl8& |l9 RE|_EASED r DEFE 3l /l l8

)

9

|

946-

|

978,77 files

tiles

UFO: policy

998)

957-

1979,99 files

DEFE 32

Defence Intelligence Staff: Reglstered files

DEFE 4l

Foreign Office and Ministry of Defeoce: Scientific Technical Intelligence Branch and overseas Liaison Branch: Registered Files

-

DEFE 4l /74 )

|

Selection of minutes from DSI/JTIC Meetings. to Working Party on Flying Saucers

75 ) (6items relating 76 ) and its RELEASED ’I 996) 1

report).

17 Unorthodox Aircraft (ufo references limited to British/Cerman press cuttings

(RELEASED I 995)

I53 (RELEASED I995)

DSI/JTIC

papers (incl. reference to Report

No. 7 "UFO’S’)


--

ufodata

DEFE 44

-- -

Joint Intelligence Bureau: Reports

|

946-1971, 100 flles and volumes |937-l961,6228boxes,

files and volumes Directorate of Military operations and Intelligence 5l 87 boxes, files and volumes wo 2o8 Directorate of Military Intelllgence l91

WO l05

7-1961,


(

SUBSIDIARY POINTS Mlitaxy Task 9 is to maintain the integrity of the UK’s airspace. This requirement is met b5r the contiruous recogxdsed air picture (radar) and an air policing capability. Any tbreat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled in the light of the particular circumstances at the :me(it might, if deemed appropriate, involve the scrambling or diversion ofRAF air defence aircraft). Alleged sightings sent to us are examined, but consultation with air defence staff and othrs as necessary is considered only where there is sufficient evidence to suggest a breach of IJK air space. Only a handful of reports have been received in recent yea$ that waxranted any firrther investigation and no evidence was found of auy tlreat. Where there is no evidence in a report of defence concem, no action is taken to ty and identifr what might have been From the types of descriptions generally receivod aicraft or natural phenomena probably account for most of tle observations Sec(AS)2 is the Air Staff Secreariat It deals with a wide range of issues. It also acts as the focal point within MOD for the Govemment’s limited interest in A answerphone is provided so that members of the public can telephone tlrough sighting reports. Reports made elsewhere, either to military establisbments, air traffic control centres or the civilian police are forwarded to Sec(AS)2. Some 230 sighting reports and 250 letters were received last year Where a military or civilian pilot considers his aircraft has been endangered by the proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object he is unable to identifi), or in regulated airspace where an Air Traffrc Controller believes there has been the risk of a collision, the pilot or ATC would be obliged to file an airmiss report (Airprox).

* * * *

*

.

’UFOs’. 24-hour

seen.

RAF-related


22 NEWS OF THE WORLD, November 14,1999 1

{

-

lo lreot heroes

{

AS the nation pays a massive public

tribute todav to its war ddad a cruelof shadow hairgs a group disabled veterins over who survive.

to-

Fifteen hundred them are to lose their jobs as seven of plants set provide up them ilose woik forspecially down. The bitter blow follows months of negotiations trade between unions and Remploy, the their employer. ln August the rvorters were toH lhat any lrploy36 who wented to stay at a Remloy ’factory corld do so ard that no plents rvould clqse.

-i ve-year

Tomono$r they will be told the truth, manasement with blamine job on a grant. freeiethein government theirlosses When Remploy plants were first set up after WarfitII they were scribed asWorld ’factories for heroes.’ Wftat an ulEraffid way to trcat orr herues.

.Atoring.help policeandsmash son risked their lives a Yardie drugs

-

MOTHER

tile’llgtgp Bfi]gll it*+,i:t";; ;gq ffirtilri:", ry6:;" being g nushovert ;il$+li+i+l$lffi whrchmeansDeoDlereweiti[s-I-_i;k;;h;i;;=d;-’;;il;;;-

to- We_ I

Dot

wsyiadtl---

poll

tri"l*T,’*Ei-

Ol

On

W

tO

work-La-

In_Eu-

parlia-

downwhat itl well cutlhe llleilhe overallofburden racking managmenis. court. tschlng prisoners tax over a ot thereschool b s lsw to turn it8 like to work. deallng out life menl. And w’d show veryone Ald would eyry primary and scoirdary sntences [o drug dealers who that Britain is no pushover

-

They befriended the mobsters, kept track their movements and tipped off theoflaw at the crucial momenf,. Then thepair carelsss coppers shopped the brave by broadcasting iheir names radios. ovef the from Dolice they picked which up by scarlners.and son cofltinuetheto Yardies’ Now mother live in fearreleased lives; for their of theirbecause tormentors, of ’legal complications’; have launched a fying campaign ofpolice revenge.must round Thames Valley up and jail the ihrigs. tud time drcy can’t expec-t public lils

’4,’1’,1,.i,;4g4q, T’lre crisis in our health servlce Ionger aod longer-for treatmenti 1, ’J;$iT" sbowsp3cr’:politiii_ roa6s -g_"lp:t1,f publrcpararysis transF,ortjoriur Kis JttlLLlAM I{AGUE OppoeHon leader l""iiffifi a n d n NEWi’; t’aw’alout L:1’"’.1’*;!:""i"",1HI;":3,i0";:: .1;:,"byi l’:hElving ’i rhe starlttng ’Jril-f i ,", lj"r’,#’#" ;.-,:,"; ; i;g,ii. l’,ii:Theon on_wirh :m,f,*jii,’* improviDs stsndards. i,"w; rfcsily asylumtoseeken?. htp pensioners f’a iririif:::":r^:":,1^::r"-f:* .ssuesThsebogus.Beiling.oul.. giveguarantee. patients irt the ssvers_w_ould Brubocl8 we’d iiltti ara-cara’Rieht ;;;i l;*;;.;’;;; . T h e n rlxeareitrlllsh a..udrque Ntr:’ with rate homes la* andsavtnga and law11"". creatinA to RoEm. rhe most sertous condi- the tien6 es_sets peopte what IDeta think are the tlons of protecl iil;ji i,iti-ao get a maximum s.ave Lrrgeht problems lacing Brirsin would their who for long term "iif,eae care. thire i.liii;idii";il;;;Hi" ng Daaed prly trme on dy. You proqably agree nre. cal largeF blr medrcal need would help working women that-actually msttr to tlie maior_ it next week s theQueen s with Spech Who lake Career bfeaks to of DeoDft, you inlroduce Famlook of ,law 1owould their childrn y1s 9911],ne^oll qrogramme a tough after. ily itvThis’w6ek willlssee a .with. ttre Conservalive govemnext make sure unemployed Scholarships that help will them government politics’l bour ihat DursuinE nehl, I ll tell you whst woulcl De people who can work take ihe il they want gel back lo priori: Own Obscure inrne.nean be rlght at job6 thar are offered to them-or We would Fropose a Budger ils it Educa.tion would tis instead of rising ro rtrd ros tnerr unemPLoymeni benellt, that would put an etrd to oI Ine speecn, Ienge of lhe real frroblems, ctri _ There would be a law l.o guaran- A revolulion in c m-fighting bour’s stealih taxes T’h trext conse’rvative qovernthis wilh :ee lo panent$ the powsr lo do make aure criminals serve open alrd hooest iomethiflg sbout bad sEhools by wDuld lhe sentetlce handed the Tax Guersate: ment would not duck th; chsl-

_"T!:

de-

inr_ La_

were-

ter i-

lo do tfte hb fioi them.

Aliens the truth THE government is to thfow open itg

top-secret on UFOoatand MinistersX-Filee have looked. themaliens. and

letrse,turn SDeeches OurtheOueen,s woild commoniense of commonsenae the Deople ioto polici.:s for the country.

s e n t-he

decided that there is nqthlng too sitive to hold bdck.hooing Enthusiasts last to atinoidents learn the truth are about all reported over the last 30 years.

second.- deter-fol-

GREAT game it wasn’t. A Amined first half at Hampden was lowed by a dull But it ordidsomanage to focuspaseions for g0 minutes the combined soccer of fans the lensth and-broadth Britain,despite ofThen, came victory, the pointless theirwhen 400 lish fans wentviolence tFe on the rampage in stfeets of Glasgow. Itts a omen for

.

Ens-

{ 1

I


YOUI{O mystery

at ol nap sca| ntsht kltl Uoodtsliod bonded lr|lo wa! ab6|} let |||gn h6r sc|lamlrg iorlcor|ft st Foadlrg; Bsrkr, dudr she tho ||F|}how. vlclourlt drd thrown hto lhs A wltmsc told !o[ce the agsd abut 20,3uf felsd faclal tududer. lr6t6cdvo S0podntsnd$t Ttbwr Ddvlo! "llle a|r

vb.atod.r.

u*

wonn,

i’H: thlg rYonlod. exkrmdy gbt Inlltoucb woman cdr rlt|| u! lhe !hould,"

ih.

A toam ot dotcdvoe wre trylng to ldq|dlt woman snd rcotrhg ml8obE pgrsott

gar.g.

roForts.thotho CCTVhsfoot46 bec|l ftom 8eqr by Poflco.

Brailt-’spaceKilfoyle. deyear8.

THE truth about whethor

X-

iens have ever visited ain is to be revealed at last, BY IAN KIRBY POIIIICAI CORRESPONDENT government Toponsecret gate, lheButUFOthetook off at an incredible ROBBED thousands Files of speed. facts about most later Apounced CAI{G of Rolor rotto.s ship’ riddles will be opened mysteries are still locked away. on Anda Foolk, include th truth abort claims

ciannel llE QVCasShopplng hr |r!odd, she prked carlhe h the eady houra.blonde gr.bbed rraa by the thbet wl le anothet bt o||g mant2,5lx! 6nalcfted hoig2tx! Cartlol neoklaco, ratch adthoto iung he. lhon glound dd mado odtoInthea slhor cari8mwlthh ltr b* col} ldnlng The attd(r!, srid to be ttack as andArdrsa In thotr pulld op stnd(

z+year-old

Hil -Nor-

to public gaze by Defence byThey up forrner defence chief Lord Minister Peter ton that RAF Feltwell in Suffolk uses They will inolude photos and It8 space-age radar, built by the US Atr investigation tails of every UFOEvery to tfack UFOS, year, sroundin Force, the past 30 H quizzod ministers about th base. 300 alien sighting8 are rported.

by milltary expefts for action inPlao6 the event of an alien invssion of London also be unvelled. ivill ThE files. stoted ia o bomb roof nucleei ker deep below Ihe Yanks rcceotlv shoutd be releosed In Slofl|e Sqrar, Loodon. leased e report of the lnTh threemove, psrt of e notorious Rirswell deot 1947, in govefnment in to drive allsn corpses wera which end unneceaaary Beefl edly Ei 6ure snd crecy, to is Nel,l, Mxico air aecret e UFO spottef3 exDlained the They frenzy. They wllllnto hope w6re dummies to learn secrets about: weather from a seiret SAIVE craft aA m balloon, UFO tedBritain’s flytog irNorth Sea rists believe there stillbut off has been a ThE coast last g(Xlft UFO shot olf et 1?,000nph when iets. sued bv two fishterse’ven Britain’B fil3 MdD’s aclAlills thit Dared the bvAircrett UFO6 have cradhed ln World since Britaln rtariat, Bt up to War IL of a Amazinslv. sate aetsHl$los fts Pope believes HE wea lar shiD in Rendl$ham ducted by aliens drivine in Florida. while etsht{veet-old boy was st: suffolk. tn 1980. Amulderod EeDt m Phile in He home In hlatrenllod his job fear of beins yoslerday by Iabelledlor a leavlne the US airmen from tqro dtackor, Bul alter the nearbv baees claim Follce bsnd BEdloy objecd secrel unit, he wr6te a roEe hovering out bstsellrs tohg cradod by hb oI incidents. then motho., He dld lort of the about alien soi&.rg blasted into spac at an He seid: "Myme thet houF @r h lpegltal from incrdible sDeed.RAF eflces convincd h6ad hFrlei. investigators cordoned olf the area, but nomnon. UFO$ are a real and threatening Tho tot’t mlrn Samaflra W alone. sre not gnd their findinss are still a Gso|o, CO,fva, alro brs{tr6. guarded ’siDce 1959,the MoD has heard of CM.to9hgr, 9,000 UFO stghtlngs, though that’$ Some details of UFO sightings in the ably t61cd had ftc h only the tip of the icebetg.’ hss rD Ftftles Sixlies have already oot been t|ie trFbed attek.at Dfence public Minister after Mr Kilfoyl the madeafpled tounder hou! ln tlr&yr lydl, Rule cll told colloagues careful sensitive So{th Wbls. "nota convinced" view of the files,thtt, he gf thgrn is the famous 1962 h Anoio ,ornnette llelghboor about the existenqe aliens. people Anne Heston d6at h ;thich Hwasy a gid a r’as she repotted Bl,,t IfroD staff sat he arant9 after shootiiq tloman swori to sectbcyobieca ydng boyltclarnlng cryhg. s.m’|r&d Eeelag a out be dble to make up theh oLtn to her cams outUood wlth hor lhoe co} ebove huge public interest. They paint a and wa trk9tl ln Tounlon, @d Someftel picture ol how UFO repotte awayhh ar Ted years earlier, RAF Flight natlog wag ant John Kilbum ssw s shininB object wore Lrvstigated-ond what vrould man A pen a We6t Yorks tlr alr Den aliens ever did land tand in 3ritain," anESt6d by pofica at tho in the rkv rky above base, if lrooag did ra b3e|g @+ , When jt6 {rre scrambld to ?* r|oosg

c.sh. 20.,

-p

bun-

ialnrceleg--bese"bodiris- theocover-up,

hau. mo.,ths. White-

ae-

6Dotztg-;ags

yeat-pur-

trluRDIR

.ltd.

OF BABY

G.oB

tdtr]|-6 s.ld: "l

!d-

h. d

thre-legged triangu6pace-.

F o r Hovef trees,

, 1-1.i,

i

m.

.series

cl6elv-’

.ndsecrJt. docume’nts. .fhirti-Year itzci’l 6 t e a ; o l d star-llke

l|ouhrcs." fd^tu,yu!!"?ei 2eygsr-old .in rPqqlqt.

Crankw.e Drhush-hus6 investiuFo3. bos-s Nic-k one-tlme

Seeb--

cnnk.

experl-phe-

prob-

rmlnd’.eLiutn-ho." _.i^TI: ,::ig:.:*:: _fjE:^"If:sh-.cgpir-invertl- VL"I:-P:.5:"2.?- "^-, . ,*

t

KITINAP AIERROR wonal rrar c.rtta .fter ttolat I van,o{nd the wEa dorcd. lwo drrgggod h.d ea ,oughlt *rGa a gar*t

NEWS OF THE WORLD, November 14,1999


E

NEYITS OF THE WORLD, November

14.1999

ONE lucky Lottery puDter 6cooped la8t night’s S6.2 mjltion jackpot.

Another 25 won S76.804 each for plus the58,205 five numbels bonus, 940 91,2?6 for five and won 945 for matchins four,. er8The wonS250,000 jackpot also your to oneThunderball ticketholder, wentLottery aIS fortu[e in written the star8? Turn to Page 26 now and fii|d the secrets of Mystic Meg’E MFtic Wheel.

play-

YOU can dlso bot on tho

o.

Lotto by playlng ldeh orrr Lucky Choice etCord 4,q)0 wlnam Hlll. Lrdbrokes bettlng 3ltop6 natiomYio. La6t

Wodnqsday’s Lotto nurl

26.trsrs: 32.31.40.l"atA,5,15,ntsht’s8’14,9, bo19

numbec numbG n|e:

Bonus

. country.- r"tt"":t:,: :"1:1":-"^’jlT-plt-d

- .*Yi-t* ,-a.--

lT was the day the whole gy taN EDTyIONDSON Gountly daft. orwenlratherfootball the & JOHN ARTER

THUNDERBAIT

SCHOLES

16. 2:1. 27. Bo|ru8 Ll.

.

-hero -great irst’-hal -"?l-i;’;dX’":","1|l"3"onf"Tiit"",l . onlt bot,-did Celzbra-

the-Scots

-"m*

tions lasted,aotrg. into the Eight railh dancing up and do*n ai fans qtieue4 sttppoftefs dancing ln the fivephotoerapher deep to drown their sorroivs. At Hatnpden the afternoon was sald: John McDonsld, 28, marred some mindless England by is feeling so louts who went the rampage lrated.’And BT engineer Dave Allen, on through Gla8gow eftr the 36, from clasgow em But for the massive telly audience ing absolutely lt’sadded: at th Etoment.

-

streets.

it-" 11d-Britain-was’

game.

_E-veiyone

fl-

frue.

s.,"e so"l depress-

iill!!’1’".ilr.i!&lllE[E5E*.’#x1i1"ll’’"iil: :. _:-E_.-= _,n.. $li*ffihiEEL-Ff,= :-’ - -;.-";," . -;,,t+xmx* (HERHti qSfl-fll[&/ "just around match whenEngland .{00 drunken

of resouoding aBattle success. ,/

s ";;;;; = roeetner w,rh itEllL=l risures.shourd nu to Ana f you i saw !F:l?l?GfiE,Z was i<iisgrace. anywhele fledrwere t?y si"mpea a ’cgr jr a Fgains.t :!ryea ry:te!9at, DsaAteaay to Eee blood all over him. HiE mothr dith c/a8 London’s Sports Cafe more thad distrEoght." 2.000 supporters DeoDle weie crammed into the sides Dozeis frofD bolh of hurled misiiles atpolic bar bv roared time. other rn The crowd had BuchanaD Street and in.each elreadv themselves ’skirmi5he6" severa.l thoolreported By ciiy singini Skinner and Baddiel’s Three the number arelts Lions anlhern well bfore the Same [aterftlernoon’ peterson,30. was one England fans, however, of Mosr o{. the. them-like h; h*i !+lyg towerds Ine slelloh "t thev steamed tried to set a tlck;tittlii"."it" snd failed. One catchang o ttain back.to so r" ea8t London summed tte dorhe said’ dS.feel soft!. !or. rtrii i" riCi"i DeIt b t ne desened ntot"a iaaea fff! ’o London.nicrrirl, o? Hreh;’i;, carter, torct kow up iL" manitsaidi "This result has cost’book_ jultnetons.l u’atchttavetbct the game "otfl1",[3i"X;;"o"g,,ig""l’Hilf$"?g: frot!_tlighton piiibeis on TVcame in London,. out of cvery i0 t;anda;k wasi;;by up an victory phere. It s When popular veryhere loud.forItthewasUnited well odds scoreline ai farEngland thi worth Manchester of most

i

the^scotrand

fr#Tr:’""j::1h’HjX"":X;

pubs were rockins’and Siiilil springs in homes and down was’Easy, Easy’. Scots ttho had, And theiad the land got a rightuppounding as fewtobrcve turned sulfer .taunts of "You England Piul pummeTled are ,up gootl lot making ethi,aky’. at GlaSSOw,i Hamnden Park^ w i th two f f * # goar6. weie greeted dalaninraidsiGtlce,’ Ar.d l .’e go ll,ild. lrrste;d it wasbvihee pumpe optics

ki;k-off

wht.

--:Suitfii" i-ici a.a * -ii".i

.r:il:.lT’1"i’::’r?f El-tIllY r,TrrxTljrY.. on.w."

hoarse-

y 9 l : . Y " 1 r . i i i l t l " " r ’ i t i t ; yirr.i".r .a’"-lo* ;n."i "ri’6.t"ri,’"i-iir-"";i..";.t-’th s.cotland’- "l-t,hJ,. , ," " U."i oi-jZ-^iti to;i..;-Ur". -!lgth:\ ,fan.,23-,year-ordatmosit." 9/1." ’ 2-O IOBTESS IOUT TUIAKES FR0mf-"1:,FAl,ts fl50,000 BYNADjAGoHEN TAXT]M r y T _ 9 1 " . : o u g l ,G ".Gffi;l :EJl":id :siAl06o-;"t jlrvj;+:[:iha’iJ,tf -.8 a ;T;"ifi f&***W ffilim"ffiH* -Jii59*:9p-.sjfJl L*."1*ii#1 rhe,srnrster. idil;-"tf irhi;":- pol!91-.:tt11td "olM|l ,-qEffitrSffi ggi-t31l r.f i-:;f i fli’idiiir,rtii5’i,iGae*

-

-"I

r.j"J "-,{_r* .;,-,’i-f i illffiiffi**-ffi;ffidffiFffi :’"i*"#i""mm’ Smhh made

rtagorlng

.

iq$"l#+ffii$ffr @W Lonnrsorue r",,t s’iL *ffr#..fl*f "!fl’r:Hffi9; to nawoor!.|. Xrl-, br-agged quid." eurw*g tF (’oonol. at th. bulq edciatpadlamnb.y W.mbley. Inve.etlgatoE thr "Do I’yewani raEl got to phono. clubs. "l doo’t |sal "l’ll of ’. i9.,"hur} them.’, sneered. trher ilckots. tdlo rnoerstooc toSmith oul undercovef alrod lvhentfhe lrwltaflom ior cdved portor later a6ked eagerly rat6 6at3 s6cdnd" agEod to 6{pDly otrs supplylng tickets in d |eg Undef you Wodd he asked: |tdse trl$ tlcl(6ts aftel we lh|n in 6equ6nce? thev wlll h re dodalr hls rtroolle mates ln a conple of thaa thoy occeDtd ttt|tt at know |f yo|| a phone round aodlnary flrne irhen ahousatiaa l6e how mudr q|ey go I cdn got ard seehave hs Smlth, a lt4GyaFold to get fam ty|E "Fllteon


DAILY MAIL l5lll/99

mystery-

by

NICK

POPE

angular were shqlp, movements. visible for Tbetoobjects two ttEe hours, down bams of ally flashing energy, Radiation light or were readings subsequently taken from the were landing slte in the found to peakforest in theand ttEee indentations where touched cralt had dosm inthe a clearing. There number are of a lntrlgulng aerial encounters ln Britai!’s of the earliestwhen tookaljFo Dlace InOne 1956, Aueust tracked was on radar systems at RAF Bentwaters and ILAF fulr Lakenheath TWo RAF jets were bled to lntercept the mystery 8rt energetic grne of crsJt, andmouse ensued the cat pilotssrrdattmpted to aswas to the quick target. But the I’FO and agile, and too who ased to elude the low Dilots. bn tuel ard eientua.lly were forced years to retrlm toa base. 40 lateEjets were berAlmost of RAFbyTornado the a UFO over1990. overtalen November was North Sea in explanatlon adequate No forthcoming. the North ever Lasta year. also over 900ft UFo was Pursued by nghter jets before it off at l?,000mph tooktwo the aredetail More the MoDthat UFOs reoorts todisturbing between were aircraft. and civil 1991,both cases tnThere such two Kent. over tn 1995. the P[ots ofa Boeing

ocqasion-

anyI reoorts. aletermrne to the uK. Doientiil to ihreat

of for out to iound explanations sishLincs’. which tumed90Pc of rdisidentifications objects ordinary lights,or saieuiSes’ ena; atcraft meteors and airslrlps. 50 years are Britain over has always However. at last being made of sightings been a hardthele core available for public irl be explained that couldn’t New under scrutiny wnereas conventional policy of greater trained such Labour’ observers potice ofEcers and Pilots have in Government, ieen openness araft doing unidentified at to reports accordinE way sDeeds andcapabilitie$ manoeuwes the weekend. Here, NICK b;yond our POPE, the Ministry ol sensational Britain’6 most 1980 in Defence officlal tormerly UFo case occured the Rendleshan Forest,inatnear responsible for airbase US$/RAF investigating I,FO bridge in visitations, terrestrial oI witnessedonover a Senes 26 previews the eagerly December nishts, then a on patrolmen two awaited contents. at2am campamong tour of thelights Perlmeier rne saw brisht trees arrd wenl thought to investigate. an Initia.lly, they FFICIAL had overshoi the runway’ IIFOS has craft est in no was there alihoush always DaneirE noise. But whal they the 3aw do had to withmore tltce no aircraft tiey’d wai than before; a Russians encountered ever triangular metallic, any impending larse chased theY which obj?cf from visit before loslng lt amonE lne keeping an eye out for trees But inSoviet aircraft the air ourthat Drobed routinelv War’ the Cold dui’ing defences that clear soon became itthere latr’ nightssrmllat UST two exotrc ’/ere otherinmore a there was BritGh operating craft lne time This space. depulY base steady a been has There sen( leports of UFO stream to ihe Ministry of Defence over a submltted Pfil$"Efi reDort the He MoD, deslnbqgln !83 as ’metglllc UFO the 200 f es, nles to more than aDDearance and trianguEr m had I have which snape when, theY are maoe ard eenc anrevears also I can Promrse There istape. able publicly, which excitlng some rrarLLo betwen conversations years was it mYJot) For three (Air Staff) 2A at as ttrey in Secretariatinvestlgale hih r150 vorr.lq.)f themoved movlng urwithin wlf,run r3u ofth Yards sucn red the MoD to ^n and yellow lights. The rcport says thai

bi’

OOCUMENTS and photographs detailing UFO investigations in

Phe4om-

terms.

extra-

inter-

Martians.

.

alr-

fltrbou’"ItrT;.acc.ess.rt. avax_ revelatlons-

sighting- co!nr-nq!:

tn-rlCiteiii.’ t-o

.

l8-minute nii-mdn

i-i i s-udareii.[v- stars, $llhH?s:ry;i,"’i-,ffi’ otl iiki ugh[s’ andbutbluegiving sreen off in all directions rn dariide

1993-

ShroD-

Jet.

the-grounq,

--a

so-cslled X-6les. too. But the nlesfles.also contain reports of 8.llenofabductions, appea.ralce crop circles and arirnal Su-ffolkscram- theUFOs. which have nutilations. been lhked allwlihof

ra-n

lock-onman-

num-

wood- Seawr-s Sufolk- activitYndar-misses accom-ajr-

by the civil Aviation Authoritv a bui Oneremained of the most fascinattdE cases that investisated I related toin an theincidenfthat Occurred early hours of Marcha wave 31, o[ IIFOThere had been sishthes nieht, that culminatint in tie direct overflight two bases, RAFinoT military Cosford RAF Shawbury ord shire. The UFO was described bv one ot a vast, militaqr witnessei as beingthe cralta oruY msrgnaUY kiargular Smaler than llew It Elowly Jumbo over the base at a height o4200ft. a narrow bearn oflisht iting before oyingbfi at at lugn speeq, ’Ihese sre then, the sorts ot lncidents MoD’s I’FOto be found in the

HE MoD was draw! into theincrop.circle 1985 five debate after they nrst ntst I+ years started appearing when farmer Middle a in Wallop, Hampshire, foundarrda quintuplet of crop circles local Army air blamed the corps base. Ainvestisated andEdgecombe and submiited to reports Fhotographs procealure a routrne the MoD, wruchlinkgaveandcredeoce one but to the uFo

Lt.Col

allega-

Phe-

Minister then Primehad tions that TtEtcher asked Marsaret

for reporl on the nomemorr the reviewed allclrcles haveabout Itheories crop are hoaxes, majry while and. ?3? encount-ered what theY have Yet are those which a brightly lit UFO there described for example, lo towhybedoexplained; approachanc while on astheir samlles arop Manchester crrcles these ’genulne had Passed from believed cellular changes. show distinct yardsthat ftomiitheir

Ai.Port,aircmft-

only lncident was invesitgaleq Ttris

tak_en

’- ’r

Some details ofUFO sighting

u


DAILY MAIL

t

I5/U/99

-

ffiffi

;i:H:tfili"*H*

si:,$,:iffit"i*Fflffi:Hs

seRuceolnneRGE #35.itr$#fi+ffi,,*t Itre U.S. M.P.i$.Fii’:iL,t{iP#h^ mb*libEffirrii"ffi ilpl*,11:1"’;l;lmT,1l" ffii",?f’lxiI"Hi##,i}i Aniiiiiiiiii llom_ls4? ’*8rxT{’"*x{."Kx**. ,#"lffi’#}ff"r# tr*li,i#,i:jlll}fi+ri+ Collf

19

F."’S’."it",lf,f"T?r:!iSitHlf ii"t""Etec-hnolog.ical nlldrl?"*"!,:1??,:t Iae secrets 5i:Hif"Hs :?i fl::fff,f ilf snort(y after going publ.ic with .nese so took the secrets ctaims, to his grave. ft

Robinion

Conspiracy theorists love this sorttoofbethlng, and are urtikely satisfied by ane papers that ddesnrt release of support their own theorie6. But there isn’t anv in thereallyalthoush-a letter sent from the Mot to government the admits that MoD policyin 1965 the subject toof B$6",1o*n My three years of ofnclal research lnto the UFO

cover-upU.S. UK.

ilteffi -, _ Thc Led5 Rifles

tr,rtncc of Vl.ales.s Own Keglrnertolyo.kshi..l

tT:;$ti+Iialtlitffi ,,19’i:!, Jli. ?1’i ii*tii",.’ff gkffiH;,H,ffii#

- _Fffi ,_

.is

phenomenon changed rny life

for ever. I’d come i.nto the job as a sceptic, came to believe that somebut LfFOs misht well be

extra.terrestrial-

Eles are to be hade If these public, I think people are in for athai, big surprise, and I believe like me, they cdll come to

r

Ftetderaf( _Hightand rarn-ing Cenlle Association

rs$*t+d"t*l;i:.p

20


I

’r-

’Loose Minute D/Sec(AS/64/l 8 September 1999 APS/USofS

Copy to: AO/AD1

.

ISSUE 1

To provide a note on the Deparunett’s interest in

.UFOs’.

RECOMMEND.4,TION

2. 3.

To note.

DETAIL

Policy

.uFos,

It is Government policy that any air defance or air traffic imprications of are a matter for MOD and the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)iespectively. MOD,s interest is limited to esrablishing from any reported silhiings receives wlether the UK Air Defence Region has been breached by nostiteliliiryitactivity, and responding to any associated public correspondence.

4’is metMlitary Task is to maintain the integrity of the uK’s airspace. This requirement by the continuous recognise! air prcture (radar)and 9

-of

caiability. Any tbreat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handledaninairtiripolicing tgnt ttre particular circumstances at the time (ii night, if deemed appropriate, involve the scrambling or divasion ofRAF air defence aircraft). prorr tirat perspective, reports sent to us of sightings are examined, but consurtation with sLff*d others as necessaxy is considered only where there is suffrcient evidence to suggest a breach.of such as reports from credible witnesses (pilots, air trJfic controllers.UKetc); those supported by photographic, or docuientary evidence; corroboration by a number ofwitnesses; or are ofavideo phanomenon currently being observed and might, therefore, be capable ofdetection. Only a handful in recent years in these categories and firther investigation of 11* them has fbund no evidence ofa threat. Airprox Reports 1 miti^tary or civilian pilot considers that his aircraft h25 6sffi en4engered by lthemele proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object hewas unable to

’uFo’ air_space:

|*i*.i"ed

ai.d"f*."

oi."pori,


6+tl Written Answers

441

19

to-

EU Readmission Issus

Mr.Lidington: To the European Commission

The Prison Service has made for eligible prisoners undertake degree andarrangements higher cgyrsel wlth rh Open Universiry.othir These ian Ue tunaeJ elmef by the pnsoner. or by the prison. a relative, though a charitable trust

ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is his policy towards the claim of that the EU should have competence over readmission I94l33l Roche: Following the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, matters conceming immigiation and asylum are now contained within Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community and are therefore within Cofiirnunity competence. The Govemment is of the view that readmission issues could fall within rhe scope of Article 63(3Xb)TEC which provides for measures on immigration policy within the area of removal of illegal residents. Under the terms of the protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and lreland, annexed ro the Treaties bv the Treaty of Amsrerdam, the Unired Kinedom mav decide to participate in the adoption and app’lication oi mgTu.eJt including readmission measures, brought Ty in Title but it is not otherwise bouncl forward Community law in this Should any readmission measures be considered to be a develoDment of the Schengen the provisions of the protocol rntegrating the Schengen acquis into the framework of the European Union would also be relevant.

Mrs.

issues.

-

academic-

To ask the Secretary State for the Department ifhe will authorise anj papers between Ministers and their UScorrespondence counierparts to be made available for public access, simultaneois simultaneous tfrei. their availability in the USA under the provisions to courtry’s freedom of information legislation; andofifthal he will a statement.

-by

Mr.ma-keStraw: The

allocation of resources for postgraduate education courses to pnsoners serving lengthy prison t947041 Boateng: The main priority for the prison Service raise levels literacy and numeracy among prisoners, but there are of opponunities for eligible prisoneri pursue to allow. courses of higher education where resources

sentences.

A prisoner would be deemed eligible a result of assessment a higher degree course wasifaasrequirement ol necessary prior to It wouldstudybefor embarking on this course the priioner to demonstrate that he or sheof was capable of anainine the qualification. Resources pay rhis could either iome Irom the govemor’s to a for rrom the pnsoner or abudget. relative. chariuble organisation or Mn To ask the Secretary State for the Home Mackinlay: Depafiment what resources areofavailable for courses. study to funher degree level in each prison; what criteria are applied in deciding the allocation oithese resources; and if he will make a t945831 is for prison governors to decide how lt much trom their annual budget to allocate to education. lhe main priority of the prison Service is to raise the Ievels of Iiteracy and numeracy among prisoners, there afe opportunides for eligible prisoners to puffuebuthigher education studies. Each application is considered on its rnenl:, 1ld is no predetermined level of funding speciiically for degree courses. Before any application can be approved. the govemor and education need to thar rhe prisoner has rhe aplirude. abitity and mouvatron to complete

.

,the-.sentence plan.

_- of-

Mr._Boateng:

-there

!":.r,irl.d

interest-

Act.

Ur.

a-

The Government’s proposals for a Freedom of lnronnanon Act are contained wirhin Freedom of Information, Consultation provisions contained on Draft Legislation. Under the

in the Bill, public authorities, including all central govemment departments, will have a duty.to comply_with requests promptly and in any event wrtiin a specified lime limit. Where rhe informarion solrght falls an exempt area, it will be for the aurnonry to consrder, on a case by case basis, whether

into_ Intormation in interest, will ensure siven b y . r h e _ aurhority. is appro-priate torward. It is for &e b-ovimment to to subject lllr 9ountr]: lr _would be wrong of ue ot in countrythe

statement.

o-ficer

te4385l

Code of practice on Access to Govemment Information sets current Govemmeni policy oo access to information.outThe of practici promotes au culture of opennss. It makesCode assumption that rntorrnatron should be release.d the except where disclosure would nor be in rhe public excenr ivnifrt Looe or ftacuce ldenuties categories of information that are exempt from the commitment to provide information, where there is a reference to harm or prejudice, there is ttre presumption that information stroutd Ue OiscloseJ unless the harm likely to arise from disclosure would outweigh the public interest in making the information available. The Code of practice is a non_statutory regime which the Govemment plan to replace wirh a Freedo"m of lntormaton It will, however. continue to operate the Code of Practice until a new Act is brought ii,to forie. Th Govemment plan introduce to Freedom of Information Bill into parliament as soon as the timetable allows.

-P-*g,a.a

Prison Education

the-

foi this prtpose.

*J

Freedom of Information Mr. Mackinlay: of Home

Mr, Mackinlay: To ask the Secrerary Srate for thethe Home Department what factors are used toofdetermine

is.toMr.

educiii-oi

In addition, the Open University has a system of financial suppon which agreed, it hasZOOO, irom thi the year starting February wias extena pay the fees for continuing st;dents inltpriron f,uilo allocated up to f100,000

co-operation

IV, area. acquis.

3o

ocToBER 1999

.

should be disclosed the public This that proper consideratio; is to all requests This the way United Kingdom to derrelop legislation which is appropriale the needs of Unired Arngdom authonties to the scope foreign legislation in context therr actrvities this It is for the Parliament of the United Kingdom to decidj such not the congress of the United States of America.matten, The draft Bill was rhe subjecr of pre-legislative by the Public Adminisrrarion Select Coirminee,5crutiny weil as a Select Committee of the House of Lords andaaspedod of public consultation. Tbe Govemment will respond to the recommendations of the Select Committees ani ro the

M

Hom force M

guidr

the I

offi,

M Hom

inqui

docu servi

POw(

the r

(Mis

M conf by ti head

Metr conti comi avOlr

Mait

9Ar M

the

Crin

sam{

heter l\4

cons

tbis

ofa Viol

Con

eligi

one

\r

exer put 1 give

resu to si

foru


It is UK Govef,nment policy that any air deforce or air traffic implications of ’UFOs’are a matter for UK MOD and the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)respectively. UK MOD’s interest is limited to establishing from any reported sightings it receives whether the UK Air Defence Region has been breached by hostile military activity, and responding to any associated public

correspondence.

The military requirement to maintain the integrity of the IIK’s airspace is met by a continuous recognised air picture (radar)and an air policing capability. Any tlreat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled h the light of the particular circumstances at the time (it might, if deemed appropriate, involve the scrambling or diversion of air defence aircraft). From ttrat perspective, reports provided to us of ’UFO’sightings are examined, but consultation with air defence staff and others as necessary is considered only where there is sufficient widence to suggest a breach ofUK air space. Only a handful of reports have been received in recent years tlat waranted fruther investigation and none revealed any evidence of a tlreat. Where a military or civilian pilot considerEd that his aircraft had been endangered by the proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object that he was unable to identifu), or in regulated airspace where an Air Traffrc Controller believed tlere had been tle risk of a collision, the pilot or ATC would be obliged to file an airmiss report (Airprox). Secretariat(Air Staff;2 is the focal poirrt within UK MOD for the UK Govenmrent’s limited intetest in ’UFOs’ and a answerphone is provided so that anyone can telephone through sighting reports. There is no special form for reporting a sighting; hformation such as the datg t:me, location and a description of what has been seen can also be sent to the MOD by Ietter, or Sighting reports made elsewhere, either to military establishments, air trafiic control centres or the civilian police, are also forwarded to Sec(AS)2. Each report is considered only to establish whether it has any defence significance. Although Sec(AS)2 is the focal point for dealing with any related public correspondencg it is not constituted as a ’UFO’information There are no defence resources allocated for this purpose and" where tlere is no evidence in a sighting report or letter of defence concern, no action is taken to try and identify what might have been seen.

24-hour

e-mail fax.

bureau. ’UFO’


,*xr TX C0f.tF IEftTtTION REPOET A1

It.lE lll,’ I 14:!:

DATE I

Tn FR{l’ll

.r{*

F5 trF I DCT

Ei:- g

ltr-rf E

’5! 14:24 FAGE.Al

FiE,,Ft5 3

t,SEt Df FG5 STF]TL|S n^ i1^El

ll


v

Loose Minute D/Sec(AS/64/1 8

September 1999

APS/USofS

Copy to:

AO/AD1

-

(UNIDENTIFIED T’LYING OBJECTS’ MOD INTEREST

l.

ISSUE

To provide a note on tle Deparftnent’s interest in ’UFOs’ RECOMMEI\DATION To note.

2. 3. 4.

DETAIL Policy

It is Govemment poiicy that any air defence or air traffic implications of ’tIFOs are a matter for MOD and the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)respectively. MOD’s interest is limited to establishing from any reported sightings it receives whether the UK Air Defence Region has been t’reached by hostile military activiry, aild responding to any associated public correspondence. Military Task 9 is to maintain the integrity of the IJK’s airspace. This requirement is met by tle continuous recognised air picnre (radar)and an air policing capability. Any threat to the UK Air Defence Region would be handled in the light of the particular circumstances at the time (it might, if deemed appropriate, involve the scrambling or diversion of RAF air defence aircraft). From that perspective, reports sent to us of ’UFO’sightings are examined but consultation witl air defence staff and others as necessary is considered only where there is sufficient evidence to suggest a breach of UK air space:such as reports from credible witnesses (pilots, air traffic controllers etc); those supported by photographic, video or documentary evidence; corroboration by a number of witnesses; or are ofa phoromoron currently being observed and might, therefore, be capable of detection. Only a handful of repofts have been received in recent years in tlese categories and fillher investigation of tlem has found no widence of a threat. Airprox Reports Where a military or civilian pilot considers tlat his aircraft has been enCangered by the proximity of another aircraft (including any flying object he was unable to

5.


gEgii$FifiiiiEiigi3qiliiEIEf,FiFEg;


,x EE

P xu

99", 3p F "qon il Hle 5* { H E^5 r’ E !j H’!6 ,E t #E

-

g

F

igrui ii, Bi Ei ii {g

stigteFiEtljlii,Ee :Y-9E #l; gs gfsF : 9sc 0s 0 ’5i rE’E Eii aEiIiEEiIiEEEgti{EgE !gE Hd *I3 :{ E;.8 iie E3 ,Hi’ :R E

5Fe ; X5

G

E

P,0

EF g g EgEf

iesi ;gffai EiFi iE E{i iia iiF

o"


*ac

e e [*t[i*+; crrr egi$ilg

i a Fti [eEE g giiii i*Eg el i rEEgiE[i i { argE g g?’$}E ii$; FigEEg[g F I t’?El [

n’r

tF[3iE[F$gili*gEEEiiE e. E. e

6


-F I

ea c*i t$ d*i sts Eti

u,Ei gH

i[ riii {

$

x

+cJ.<o!

Yti>

F

$F eQ= grii

ls4* r’ [’i .g6R.k ’BH; ?+r-3

E[i $3i

aggE $ FFg

ig{

qFrg ifE A C gH FdP

eg HESfi q* ;gE E: 3H 5:" gg ++rA d5. eif*q IE.5i.: xEP9 ^e H.Fe3:. bi

Iggg*eilg*iiitlffil ;s*$fr rf,# E:aYe si Ef,E$gIiiEF3iFi &Fas ; tr-v = v Bg g Es u*F $ $ d ii

H

g; :HE:

A

-l

E

H

gH

rEallg


:ggg;:+tE;;

FB ffi;i EJi E #:

$;,g;ececEEEsii E$ElEEi $;;e $E$gF;*.ttaxa’ltE5 cEt{

;i"-g- $;-

eE E

$s$FEEgiiEsgflii;i; $iE5R;! gEE guiEi Eig

F.,

s

giE :E EE E*g FgiF di d E

{

d

EE

:E3E H 5gAE

EggFFigig;iii,iEEF’EiEigg


6qt \

Govemmcnt tt5 JTJNE 19991 Spaceguard Programme and central government. If, as a and the Spaceguard Foundation among 4laolved bodies LCIs) they arc to be published they are available for European Space Agency is also mountingotla Jrality, produce a system for the co-ordination Dublic ssutrny and comment. world-wide capability in near earth object Viscount Waverley: My Lords, is it considered that At the prsent moment,the Governmenr placed in the Library will rcmain plans to set up a national spaceguard agency, I concordats in Welsh confidential? will consider the possibility when we receive the the Turin meeting. Any additional work undertaken lnrd Williams of Mostyn: My L,ords, they will not be inof the UK must have Welsh Assembly aul UK

D9

*;5

confidential because my noble friend Lord Cledwyn, the noble Lord, Lord Robens, and I will have read them. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, will the concordats to be made between the UK Govemment and the Welsh Assembly be debated in this House of Parliament? Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, no, that is not the intention. The relevant territorial Secretary of State will be authorised on behalf of the UK Parliament to enter into those agreements. It is then a matter for the devolved bodies as to what they want to debate, in what detail and in what It is entirely a matter for the Assembly, but I would expect that some ofthe concordats or memoranda ofunderstanding will be debated. Lord Roberts of Conwy: My Lords, the Minister has been most helpful, but can he tell the House a little more about what has been referred to in the other place as the "overarching" concordat dealing wirh the ielationship between the Welsh Assembly and the UK representative in Brussels? What is the further scope of that concordat and does it involve Scotland too?

form.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords,I am happy to assist your Lordships in answering that question.

concordats-they plural-ielate

bene{it over and above that beins

Lord Tanlaw: My l,ords, I thank the Minister for Science for that Answer, which study with interest. [s he aware of the most recentI shall astronomi;al data which forccasts that a potentially hazardous asteroid desiglated 1999 AN 10, weighing approximaiely 2 million tonnes and a kilometre in size, will miss thl earth by only 24,000 miles on 7th August 2027 and will possibly impact on its return in 20.44? Is he also aware that, unlike a NATO missile travels at appmximately 500 miles an hour which a pre-pmgrammed trajectory, AN l0 is approaching on earth at 25,000 miles an hour on a chaotic orbit and will reqBire a more detailed observational data before the International Astronomical Union can definitelv cenifv it as harmless in the years following irs approaih in thl year 2027? May I therefore ask the noble Lord the Minister for amdoes sorry, but the issue is somewhat he intend to calculate the risk for the next generation posed by the low probability but high consequence threat of 1999 AN l0 and other potentially hazardous asteroids which have a

Science-I technical-how

impact probability?

non-zero

Furthermore, is the noble Lord the Minister for

The overarching are to questions of Europe,intemational relations, statistics and inward investment between the United Kinsdom Covernmenr and the devolved That is pan 6f the continuing process ofdebare and negotiation tajdng place

Science aware that only l0 per cent of near earth obiects which could be classified as hazardous have been identified so far?

Spaceguard Programme

of Turville: My Lords, I am aware the situation and all that information on asteroid of1999 AN It was discovered in January. The estimated probabiliry is one in 500,000 of collidins with the eafth during im 2024 encounter. It is the’refore extremely rcmote. It is important that this information

bodies-

at the

moment.

?.50 p.m.

_

Lord Tanlaw asked Her Majesty’s Government: What steps ate being taken to form a national spaceguard centxe, as part of a European spaceguard programme, to improve the assessment and probability factor of impact hazard of a near earth object on the continent of Europe or in the seas sunounding

it.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, D-epartment of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville); My Lords, the Government take the potential tbreat of impact by near earth objects very seriously, but we rcgard

it as an issue where common utemational approach is essential. The a therefore supported a recent workshop on monitoringUK Ior asteroids and comets in Turin eadierprogrammes this month, which was sponsored by the European Space Agency

taken internationally.

Lord Sainsbury

_

10.

is transmitted regularly and we hope that in due course the spaceguard website will convey the information to public. the

-

Lord McConnell: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if such a centre is to be established in the United Kingdom the obyious place is fumagh observatory in Northern Ireland where they have the experience, have undertaken a great deal of research and where work can be carried out most effectively?

Lord Sainsbury of Turvilte: My tnrds, one of the key issues in this regard is that any programme of detection or deflection should be on an international [n view of the fact that we would not be able to tell where such things were going to land until the last moment, it would be absurd if each country were to

basis-


l3l

Spaceguard Programme

Kosovo: Retuhr of Refuge.s

lLoRDSl

[Lono Se,rNsaurv or Turvrur] have its own detection and deflection programme. Therefore, it is important that we have an intemational effort. The ESA is working on an international effort. When it has been produced we will examine what contribution we can make and the Armagh observatory will be an obvious candidate to play a part in that. Lord Winston: My t ords, in addition to consulting other agencies, has the Minister considered consulting the right reverend Prelates? Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My t ords, I believe that prayer would certainly be a key part of any strategy. Viscount Davidson: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the asteroid has already landed and is called William Hague? Baroness Nicol; My Lords, am I right in believing in the odds quoted by the Minister are twice as good as the odds of winning the lottery? Does not that give him cause for concem? Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, the odds are extremely remote and are comparable to winning the National Lottery. That means we should have one instance about every 100,000 years. Lord Mackie of Benshie: My how does the Minister propose to deflect these objects? Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, the main consideration in deflection, if it ever gets to that point, is that the longer time one has between the time one observes the object and the time of impact the easjer it is to deflect it because one can deal with less force. A number of proposals haye been made ranging from impact on the asteroid, to nuclear weapons, to detonation on the surface of the asteroid. Clearly, in most cases, if we observe it early enough it would be possible to think rf a strategy to deal with Lord Wilberforce: My Lords, is the Minister aware of the fact that the name of spaceguard and the concept of it was devised many years ago by the eminent science fiction writer, Arthur Clarke, now Sir Arthur Clarke, who is a British subject and has his own telescope? Does that not fumish a very shong reason why we should have our o*n national agency, no doubt working with the international agencies, in order to draw on the great experience and imagination of that great v,Titer? Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords,I must disagree. There are more important considerations as to whether we have our own agency. The first question is whether work should.be done by any of the current bodies rather than invoking new agencies. Lord Tanlaw: My Lords, I am sorry that the Minister has been subjected to the which is a problem involved with this subject. Does he agree on the general principle that if nations are prepared to pay

l-ords,

it.

C.

giggle-factor,

l)L

to preserve their civilised past for the current seneradon, should they not be equally to oiv for the pJservauon of a civilised futurepreDared fo,rbe nexieJneration? Would not a first step in this direction to a national spaceguard centre as paflU"of a European contribution to a global spaceguard programme which couro Denelrt the tuture of all mankind? of Turville: I would not .Lord.Sainsbury wish to imply in any way that thisMyis Lords, a rrivial issue. It is a serious issue because the chances of are exkemely small, the while impact of any object more than a kilometre in length be consideratle. Therefore, we propose to workcouid throueh Of all subjecrs which come hefore rhis Housi, this is one in respect of which an international effort is the We shall play our part in that rather than acting

ti-roUr"riUe

mainly.

rmpact_

ESA.

key.

independently.

Kosovo: Return of Refugees

2.57 p.m.

Lord Blaker asked Her Majestyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Govemment: Wlat preparations are being made for creating conditions in Kosovo which will encourage refugees to return there once a settlement of the disDute with Yugoslavia has been achieved.

l-ords,

Baroness Amos: My the refugees are keen to retum to Kosovo as soon as their security is guaranteed. As the intemational security presence is established in Kosovo and as Federal Republic of Yugoslavia security forces withdraw, so we,in close collaboration with the military and UN,can begin the considerable task of providing the displaced persons and refugees with humanitarian support and assistance to rebuild their homes and essential infrastructure. The Department for Intemational Development is currently establithing a field office in Pristina in order to better assist with this

task. Lord Blaker: My Lords,I thank the Minister for that statement. However, perhaps I Inay express my disappointment that this Question is not being answered by her noble friend Lady Symons who I informed yesterday that my Question would be a political one and

not an aid question. I want to refer to a matter which I believe is relevant to the question of the enthusiasm or lack of enthusiasm of the refugees to retum to Kosovo; that is, the risk of continuing friction or disagreement between NATO and the Russians which could certainly discourage refugees retuming. Given the helpful role of Russia in securing the and the known willingness of Russia to provide troops, is it not surprising that no role was provided for Russian troops in the military agreement? I am not justifying Russian action in relation to Pristina airport but it is important to understand why they may

cease-fire

have taken this action. Noble tords: Order!

Blaker: My Lords, w.ith silence, I shall come my Question. President Yeltsin referred toLord to the


a

*-.r’" rts-=-Cr e

1999

ast month, the Govemment published a draft lreedom of Information (FOI)Bill for a period of public consultatron. More wide ranging than the present Code of Practice on Access to Govemment Information (it will apply not just to central Goyemment, but t0 many more bodies, such as local authorities, the NHS and the Police), the subsequent FOI Act wiil have the follo’r’ing key features: it will glve anyone a right of access to information held by public authorities, enforceable in law; it will normally require the release of documents where requested, not just of information; it will establish an Information Commissioner with the power to overnrrn a Deoartment’s decision to withhold information and order disclosure; recognising that certain information should be protected from disclosure, it will contain a number of exemptions allowing for disclosure of information for a variety of reasons including national security, defence,international relations, personal privaq/, and commercial interests. Vexatious requests and those which could only be answered at disproportionate cost, can also be refused. The PUS,Kevin Tebbit, wites about what this will mean for MOD. "Giving people a right of access to information part 0f the wider programme to modernise isGovemment. It is therefore al important development in the way we Although Govemment Deparhents have been operating in accordance with the C0de of Practice on Access to Government Information since its introduclion in 1994,a Freedom of Information Act wiil put that right of access on a strtutory footing, which gives it that much more emphasis. The Bill itself can look daunting because of the legal language in which it is wdtten, but although the precise tirnescale is not )et certain, all staff will receive guidance in plain English

.

non-

work.

Monthly distribution 37,000 Hard Copies and now available on MODWeb


O

Page 2 of 5 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION:how will it work it falls within one or more exemptions. The Bill also allows "neither confirm nor

denyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

to refuse vexatious or repeated requests, and has a disproportionate answers, an ability beyond which requests need not be answered (this will be set initially at

cost threshold, 8500, the same as for PQs).A 40 day period will be set for answering requests (it is 20 working days under the Code), and guidance and best practice on answering requests will be set out in a code of practice. Exemptions from Riqht of Access The exemptions (listed below) divide into those which are outright exemptions, and those which will be subject to a harm test. Some,such as that concerning policy advice, and others which are Each contain elements which are exemption has its own self-contained definition, mainly expressed in terms of the ability to withhold information which "would, orwould be likely, to prejudice" the interest in question. Decisions about whether or not to withhold information will also be able to take account of whether apparently innocuous information in conjunction with other information would be likely to cause harm (known as "cumulative harm"). Whilst these exemptions give scope to protect information which should be protected, the FOI Act is intended to contribute to a more open approach in the relationship between the public sector and the public. Decisions should therefore be made on a case by case basis, with a view towards disclosure where possible. The exemptions are as follows: Outriqht exempted information which will not be harm tested information already public (including information for which a charge is made, such as the services offered by the Met Office); information intended for future publication; information held by Departments which was supplied by, or relates to, the work of the security and intelligence agencies (including Armed Forces units in support of GCHQ), and the Special Forces; information required for national security purposes; confidential information from a foreign state or iniernational organisation; investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities; information contained in specified courts, information relating to the formulation or development of government policy, communications between Ministers, including Cabinet and Cabinet committee proceedings, and the operation of Ministerial private offices (see also the "internal discussion" exemption at (u)below); personal information. The main effect here is to allow access by individuals to personal information about themselves only through the Data

6.

harm-tested,

not. harm-tested

7.

a. b.c. d.e. fg.. h.

i. Protection jConfidence): . information

Act: provided in confidence (to be subject to the Common Law of

http

://www.chots. mod.uVpolicy/opengovt/foD.htm

25t05t99


I

Page 3 of5 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION:howwill it work legal professional privilege; trade secrets (but see the wider commercial interests exemption at (w)

k.l.

below);

m.n. honours; where a exemption, covered o. covered an order-makingpowerpower. Essentially, fall-backwhich

staiutory bar to disclosure exists; information by another which may any additional information not this is a by be to withhold something which would gives the Home Secretary the otheruise slip through the net; exemptions (ie information can be withheld if it "would. or would be likelv to preiudice" the interest in question) defence of the UK or overseas territories, or the capability, effectiveness, or security of the armed forces or those of allies; international relations; relations within the UK (ie with devolved administrations);

Harm-tested

p. q.

rs.. economy; tu.. enforcement; discussion Ministerial), or levels, v.w.commercial (here, the

law and advice (a wide exemption which will apply at all internal not just which would otherwise prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs; the threshold is "endanger"); health and safety interests of public authorities or other bodies.

Who Decides?

disclosure will, as decisions 8.branch responsible question. case now, forthe

-

-

is the be made by the lead about Initial Central guidance will be produced, and subject in There will be scope for advice will be available on individual cases from Departments to establish an internal appeals process (as MOD currently has for the Code)to act as the first line for appeals. An lnformation Commissioner, who will also be responsible for Data Protection issues the post will be combined with that of the Data Protection Registrar will act as the next line of appeal. The Commissioner will have a key part to play in promoting, interpreting and enforcing the Act, and will be able to overturn a decision of nondisclosure by a public authority if he or she considers the exemption is wrongly claimed (except in the case of national security). Public authorities (or the requester, if unhappy with the Commissionerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s decision) Tribunal on the Data Protection model, one person can then appeal to a representing legal interests (appointed by the Lord Chancellor), and the other two representing the interests of the public authority and requester of information

9.

10.

DOMD.

3-person

respectively (both appointed by the Home Secretary). Appeals on national security,

http

://www.chots, mod.ulcrpolicy/opengovt/foD. htm

25105199


O

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION:how will it work

Page 4 of 5

however, go straight to a Tribunal and not through the Information Commissioner. Appeal against a Tribunal may then go to the Courts for judicial review. Departments will also have a duty to consider exercising their discretion to disclose information technically exempted from the right of access, if they consider it to be in the public interest. The Information Commissioner will have a duty to see that Departments do consider using this discretion, but the decision whether or not to disclose exempted information in the public interest lies with the Department, and cannot be overturned by the Commissioner. Duty to Publish As part of the aim of increasing openness in the public sector, Departments will be Much of this MOD required to make certain information available as a matter of already does, through publications as the Defence White Paper, Annual Report, and Defence Statistics. Departments will, however, have to produce a publication scheme for approval by the Information Commissioner which sets out what information it intends to publish. Fees and Charqes As under the present Code, Departments will be able to set up a charging regime within centrally set parameters under the disproportionate cost limit. Fees and charges are not, however, intended to recoup the full cost of the FOI regime.

11. 12.

course.

13.

Outstandino lssues Devolution. Ministers have agreed that organisations dealing wholly or mainly with devolved matters (in Scotland), or transferred matters (in Northern lreland) should be covered by local legislation. In other words defence, as a reseryed matter, will be covered by the UK FOI In addition, Ministers have agreed that the ability to legislate on information supplied by the UK Government in confidence, to ensure that it was disclosed according to the terms of the UK FOlAct only, is to be reserved to the

14.

Act.

UK Parliament.

15. 16.

Parliament.Further discussions are necessary about whether Parliament and bodies accountable to it will be covered by the legislation. Environmental Information Requlations. The current environmental information regime needs to be modified to enable the UK to implement the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on access to information on environmental matters. The intention is to do this through the FOI Bill, but this will follow on after publication of the draft Bill. FINALLY This is a g[g[! Bill, it has not yet become law and will not do so for some time In the Guidance on how to comply with the Act will be provided for staff before it in force, meantime, the Gode of Practice on Access to Government Informationwithremains and replies to requests for information must be made in accordance it details can be found in DCI 54198,but look out for a new DCI shortly. Where Can I Find Out More? A copy of the draft Bill and consultation paper can be purchased from the Stationery Office, but will be made available on MODWeb as soon as possible, and can also be

17.

http

://www.chots.mod. uVpolicy/opengovt/foi2.htm

-

does.

2sl0sl99


O

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION:how will it work

Page 5 of 5

al www.homeoffice.gov.ukfioi. Links to the Home accessed at the Home Office website the section of the MoD office site can also be found through open Government Information will be appearing in the June editions lnternet site. Articles on Freedom of questions or comments can be put to DoMD, which of FocUS and Paper clips. Further is the MOD policy lead on Freedom of Information. They should be addressed to: DOMD

Rm 617 Northumberland House Northumberland Avenue London WC2N sBP

http://www. chots.mod.uk/policy/opengovVfoi2.htm

2st05199


t REPORT OFâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;AN

l.

2.

J. 5.

6. 7.

UNNXPLAIII-ED AERIAL SIGETING

Date and time of sighting. (Dwation of sighting.) Description of object, (Noof objeots, size, shape, colour, brightness, noise.)

Exact position of observer. (IndoorVoutdoors, stationary/moving.) IIow object was observed. (Naked eyg binoculars, other optical device, camera or

camcorder.)

Direction in which object was first seen. (A landmark may be more helpful

than a roughly estimated bearing.)

Approximate distanee. Movements and speed.

(side to sidg up or down,

constant, moving fast, slow)

8.

Weather conditions during observation. (cloudy,haze, mist, clear)


t,

9.

To whom reported. (Police, military, press etc)

10. ofName, address and telephone no informant.

11.

Olher witnesses.

t2. Remarks, 13.

Date and time of receipt.


1.

Annex

OUESTIONS FROM Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;NION SKYLINE

line on rUFOsr ? The Ministry of Defence examines any reports of â&#x20AC;&#x2122;unidentified flying objectsr i!somereceives solely to establish whether whatthere lras seen have might defence significance; namely, whether is any evidence that the United Kj-ngdornrs airspace rnightactivity. have been compromised by hostile or unauthorized foreign military lUFor/flying saucerr The MOD has no experfise respect or orofroletheinexistence of otherwise question matters the or to of extraterrestrial about which lifeforms, renains it totally minded. knowsphenomena. of no evidence to substantj.ate the exj.stenceToofdate, theseMOD alleged Does investS.gate reports?inIfittsso,investigations? lrhat are the findings? Is MoDMoDproactive or reactive provides Unleas aKingdom evidencemilitary reportfrom of a potential threat to theno United an external source, and t,o date ruFor report has MOD makes no atlempt to revealed such evidence, precise naLure each MoD identify reported the of sighting,lights believes explanations, such that rational as aircraft or phenornena,purpose, natural could be found them were for if resources diverted forthisthiskind of aerial but itidentification MoD is not the function of the provide to service and would it be an inappropriate use of defence resources if MOD was to do t{as MODrs attitude changed in the last 40 years? What is the MODrs official

open-

3.2.

4.No. 5. s interest

so.

MOD consider investigating further objects for which thereWould no obvious explanation? is initially MOD| response to Ql in these natters is limited to that set out in the

.


MOD INTEREST

Ir

"I’FO" SICHIINES

to resPect or role with has noorinterest Defence The Ministry saucer" existence the of tolifeforms the question matters, "UFo/flvina ofof extraterrestrial about lvhich it remaine "ifr=iwi5e MoD is unaware of any evidence however, the To date, wirich proves that these phenomena it sightings ofseen mig}rt reports examines any r{hat Defence of to The Ministry Eome have was r,/hether establ,ish solely receives the uK Air there any evidence.that nanely defence by hostile or beeniscompronised have night military Defence significance; Regionforeign

"iopen-rninaed.

exist.

"uFo"

activity. unauthorized Department’8 ofiethe with the assiotance are examined, The reports of a evidence there required. as exPerts delence air has "UFo’’ sighting and date no to threat; Dotential to identify the precise do nottoattemPt such evidence, we ievealea to We believe that dov’rn us’ reported each of nature as such. reporte, these for be found could explanationi earth vTere diverted phenomena, if reeourceEiulg lights orbutnatural aircraft defence wouLd be an inapproprl?!? it ior tfris p.tipose to provide this kind of aerial identificationofservice.

’"ion." "-

mil-ilarysighti-ng

unl-ess


,

fRot’1 FRBII cRo dnlEs

*

s

-E== o i

t9.12.199

t0!gS

(rrffi

Lo r gEE H X IE ’l eEEE ==3: 3 rg O ;E;.E 5 IT9{ E ;ga=.=

ije F;.8 $Ftr

F.

I

2


FR0tr FRofl CR0 ldfiLE5

19. 12.199

t0r05

o

cct Ell

(D=

Eg

ffiffffiffi$mff EEE ’* Eg#

EHga-HrtegEEsg,

EEEEI

Effi’ ffi*t’ut’g

ffiffi#ffi


I

ldafsrpf*Rs’s ft/0e/",lE:15 5 i { ltstf,.g$ 1 r? #,11ffi8H4 t|lfit$JITts

r,.-s8

TnlAt

fil{t[fi [A$1

ti#fli

Itl-:

I

.cStret, a

icc

’lf]tr,or1 ti

8a.;eit ftrdeft, 6aiiick la’dsn 01?1 8y,{,T5? tliT t#: ?i#,lll$i


"UFO’SICHTIIiTGS The Ministry of Defence has no interest or role with respect to ’uFo/flying matters, or tolifeforme the question ofwhich the iteiistence otherwieesaucer’ oropen-minded. ofToextraterrestrial about remains MOD is unaware of any evidence however, date, the which proves that these phenonena exist. The Ministry of Defence examines any reports of ’UFO,sightings it receives whether solely to establish what lras seen might-have some defence namely significance; there evidence any UK,s that the airspace been compromised by hostile or unauthorized might have foreign rnilitary activity, MOD INTEREST Il{

j-s

The reports are examined, with the assistance of the Department,s defencethreat air experts as required. UnLessfrom there is evidence of a potential Unit,ed to Kingdom the an external military tde do not attenpt to identify the precise nature of each source sighting reported tobe foundWe-befieve down to earth thaf explanations could these for such as aircraft reports, phenomena, Iights or natura], were if resources diverted for thie purpose would but be an inappropriate it use defence of resources to provide this kind of aeriaL identification service.

u6.


The Ministry of Defence has no interest or role with respect co

matters, or tolifefoims â&#x20AC;&#x2122;uFo/flying the guestion ofwhich the eiist".r"e oropen-minded. othervrisesaucerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ofToextraterrestrial about, remains date, however, the MOD is unaware of anyit evidence

exist.

which proves that these phenomena The Ministry of Defence. examines any reports of ,UFO,sightings it receives gofgly to establish lihether what was seen th;t the UKsome defence significance; namely there any is evidence Air Defence Region might. have been compromised by hostile or unauthorized foreign

might-have

rnilitary activity. The reports are examined, with the assistance of the Department.,s defencethreat air experts as required. Unlessfrom there is evideirce of a potential the united Kingdom to an external rniLitarv source, does nottoattempt,to ident.ify the preciee nature of each Lhe MODreported

sj-ghting

it.


o

SESSION 1997

HOUSE OF COMMONS

wH008976 ililIililil ffffi tilill|| ilil til til ||1

puBLIC ADMINISTRATION lrlll o o s\ 1L COMMITTEE Third Report

YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW: THE GOVBRNMENT’S PROPOSALS FOR A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

Volume II Memoranda of Evidence Ordered by Tlne House of Comrnons to be printed 19 May 1998

LONDON: THE STATIONERY OffiCE

HC398-U

19.50


176

MEMORANDA SUBMITTED TO

An improvement on thc current scheme would be the imposition of a duty on the satutory bodv to comDlv witb an urgent response prompdy, within 24 or 48 hours of a requst bing such requeits would made in genuinely urgent cases and we do not believe that a duty to comply with such a request would be onerous. In som cases, arly disclosure of the file would allow resolution of the pafiicular to b ;roblem achicved without tecourse to the Where legal action is necessary to protect our cliint’s interests, proceedings could be launched on a relevant documents havJ been disclosed, so that all if both parties and the court are in no doubt as to the relevant issues.

made.

onlv’#

courts. sure-footing

April 1998 MEMORANDUM 95 Submitted by lhe Ministry of Defence

Ir.mnooucttov The Ministry of Defence welcomes the opportunity to assist the Committee’s into rhe Freedom Information White Paper Your Right to Know. Ttis memorandurn aims to answer inquiry th; sFecific questions oosedof the Committee, bearing in mind that further work is curently in hand to translate the broad irf O" White Paper into a draft Bill,

b-y

p-porutt

what concemt do you have about the white paper in termt of the impact on your department? what is Ql’ likely to cause you pafticular difrculty? The Ministry of Defence already oprates under

tcrms of the Code of Practice on Access to Information, which has done much to encouage a the culture of increased opnness and a willingnessGovemmenr to providc information about how it does its business. Tbe department already publishes a great deal of iiformation about what it does in its srtnual white Paper, Departmental Performance Reporr, and many other publications, such as its conservation magazinc, Sanctuary. At least in thc early stages, we anticipate an increase in applications for information, which could impose heaYy admilis$ative load. The depadment is concemed that the FOI regirne should be easily understood by alla staff and be simple to operate in order that it does not become an exlessive and costly We neef in particular to ensure that staff are clear about what is meant by "substantial harm" in ordir burden. that they are atrle to operat the harm test effectively, both in order to favour release where possiblc, and to withhold where that is warranted. In addition, the change to a requirement to provide copies of documents,information rather than providing information, will require dme and effort to identify specific documentJ and to decide whether all or pan of them arc suitable for disclosure.

Q2.

Will the exemFtiot provisions of the White Paper provide sfficient protection to the kind.s of inlornvtion hald by yow department which you think need to be protected?

r . "t"rn.nts -of a.i"n;.

The White Paper’s proposals recognise, particularly in the spcified interesrs securiw defcnce and intemational relations, and commercial confidentiality, that there covering national ;;;;i; which should remain protectd. Therc is further protertion fo,r such interests by the acknowledgement that a decision taken under the FOI Act should rot forcc a disclosure under the ofii;ial Secres Act.’whilst somc issues remain to be clarified, such as what is meant by "substantial ham" and the mechanism for anv third oarty right of appeal (given that the depanment holds a grat deal of information provided by individuals, forcign govemments and irtemational organisations), in general the proposals in th; white compunieJ. typs of information that the depaftment believes netds to be protected.

r"p","oi"i tt"

Q3,

Can the FOI Act repeal and supersede all the existing stqtutory bars to disclosure in your departnent,s fieA of responsibility? If not, which el]sting statutes need to be preserved, and why? There are provisions of the Naval Discipline Act i95?, Army 1955, and Air Force Act 1955 whict contain bars to disclosure. work is in hand to determine their futureAct in relation to the Fol ltlhat lessons have ywu leamt from thz operarion of the Code of Practice which are rclevant to ,he tikel! operotion of the FOI Act? The th9 importance of clear guidance for staff and the availability of a clear and well-publicised focal point for intmal advice. We have a single secrctariat which provides advice across the and its existence helps to establish a consistent and positive approaih towards the release ol +Partment information throushout

Q4.

Act.

principal- lessons_ areMoD.


THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

177

What .lo Jov estinete to be the likel! volume of requests tlnt you v’ill receive arter passage of the FOI Q5, Act? lvhat is the bdsis of these estinutes? overseas compaisow: experience of the Code). What arc the

(e.g-,

cost and staffing implications? We have madc no estimates of the volume of requests under FOI nor of the likely cost implications. As the process is demandled, such estimates would be highly speculative. We have assumed that there will be a considerable increase in FOI requests compared with Code requests, at least initially, simply be.cause of the iucreased public awareness of the FOI The numbcr of formal Code requests received in 1997 was about E0 but we do not believe that this can be uscd as the basis for any stimatc of the likely demand under We are curently considering the staffing implications, particularly of the likely [eed to increase the size of the cetrftal secretariat in order to provide training and advice, although this will depend in part on any decision on whether to phase in the Clearly, however, we are not startilg from a zero baseline as wc already have experience of dealing with the Code.

Act.

FOI.

Act.

Q6.YesIsit is, We

thc proposed regime for fees and charges realistic and workable from the departmcnt’s point of view? already oprate a charging regime under the Code for requests that involye significant costs,

although it is rarely invoked.

Will there be any difficuky in the overl.apping access regimes for FOI and Data Protection proposed in Q’l, Chapter 4?

The White Paper acknowledges that 6e two regimes need to accommodate each other and that the access regime wiu be intended to cnsur that ar|y complexity is not rcflected in the way that it is presetrted to th It will obyiously be important for staff to be aware of any significant differences betwee[ the two regimes in order to opemte them effectiYely.

user.

Q8.

Whet dfficulties will arise fiom the proposed third pertf notification procedure in cases of personal privacy, commercial confidentiality and information supplied in confidence (paragraph 5.19)? As noted in the response to Q2,MoD holds a great deal of information which is provided by or concems third parties, whether they be individuals, defence companies, foreign govemments or intemationa.l organisations (such

uN).

as NATO and the The precise details of a third party appeal mechanism remain to be defined, but there will certainly be cascs where the deparbnent will need to consult third parties prior to making a decision on discloswe. learly that could be a burdensome and exercise if it has to be undenaken on a regular basis, The depadment nill therefore be keen to consider procedures which avoid the ned to co[tact third parties at the time of a request. These could include ensuri]lg that third parties are aware in advance that information may be disclosed, and clarifying which elements they believe should oot be disclosed, and

iirne-consuming

why.

@.

Where you have controcred with pivqte contrqctors to provide senices to you, do you know whcther they have received requests for access to infonnation under the Code? We ale not aware of any contractors receiving such requests, but we would cxpect that requests for information about MoD conhacts for services (and goods) would usually be directed to the department. Moreover, i! is likely that if conttactors had received such requcsts, they would have sought guidance from the Departmetrt about the requiremetrts of the Code.

QlO.

What truining, if any, have your staff received for dealing with ifiernal "appeals" against relusols before the Pq.rliamentary Connissioner for Adminktretion is resorted to? Guidance on how to oprate the present Code of Practice is p.ovided to all staff in the department, civilian and military, iDcludiflg within iti agencies, That guidance includes an explanation of the review procedures, and is available orl the department’s main intemal computer networks as well as the lntemet. Alt appeals arc handled guidance, so although no formal training in dealing by the single secretariat that proyides the with appeals is given, a common approach is adopted. Assistance in irterpreting the Code is gaircd ftom examples of cases that have becn considered by the Ombudsman,and advice is also sought as required from the Cabinet Office’s Freedom of Information Unit and the Ombudsman’s office.

departrncnt-wide

Qll,

In the contrscts tlut you have with commercial organisations, is therc anything which you thin* shouw remain commercially conftd.entiol? If so, whot son of things are they? The department would not wish to disclose information from our cortracts with comrnercial organisations that would jeopardise our ability effectively to manage commercial tsansactions in a manner and to the standards


-.

178

MEMORANDA SUBMITTED TO

demanded of a public sertol procurement

organisation. In meeting these. standards, the rights on whicb we rery

pbe-co".r"aiote"i"-til’rffiii;j;il" r.-."r.i y ," ri ."

are based on industry’s clear understanding that the depaffnent caribe relicd on to inf.which ormation. To prevent this position being prcjudiced. ther" fou, r"in we

inro which fall information believe shouid remain commercitllyconfidential (and rhus should ty of commcrcial confidentiality): (l) Information that would prejudice negotiations or comrnerciavcontactual activities; (2)Information relatin to trade secrets. or intelectual property beronging to a third pafty whicb would harm the competitive posirion of a third party an’M# contractor)l (3)Information given to MoD itr confidence, such as price breakdowns and pricing data; (4)The issuc of comrncrciar confidentiarity arso arises in the case of tbe Defence Expon services Organisation’s support for defence exporte.s, where information is provided io aonria’"n"" t by exporting compades and foreign g;vemments.

--

"ut.gones

1e,g.,

-r lob

Q12’ Does the department have an Internet site? what documents hqve lou pubrished on the sire? How ofren has it been updated? When uias it last updated? The Ministry of Dfence does have an Intemet site at http://rywv.mod.uk A wide variety of itrformadon is on it, including; specbes of the Seffetary of Stat for Defence; documents and explanatory notes on NATO enlargement; information on the UK’s bilateral defcnce relations with cenhal and eastem Europe; a rnaJor section on Gulf veterans’ illnesses, to address the concems of Gulf wal veterans and make available repotts and research; the reced Creen paper on Defence Diversification; and irformation on doing business with The site is updatcd regularly, usually atound twice a now underway to re-establish the MoD’s web presence on a basis more focused on the neds of the Based on exre*ive consultation,. as well.as anatysis’oi r"bph;;; il: deprtment.is implementing a new strategy. The guiOng princifie jl thar rntormatron should be clear and easv to fiDd, without needing prior knowleOgJor I\4Od.s st enquiries. A ceotral internct has ben. set up io deverop and promote quality ttana;d,;oi ;;;;;i; strategic, elitorial aDd design team assista&e for information providers wiihin me oepartment.

MoD-sponsored

MoD.

is-

w.ork user.

wek.

worrd-wide ;;"*;;;;;;r,il; inri-ul u"rui".rt.r" ;ii;i;;;;;.:ffi;dffi;:1

Apfl 1998

MEMORANDUM 96

I

Submitted b! the Norrhem lreland ffice

what concems do vou hqve about the white paper in terms of the impact on your department? what is

likely to cause you particular difrcully?

our experience other such as the six national standards of central govemment under the code on openncss’ is thatofwe haveinitjatives, not been inundatedqith requesls for information. public authorities to make cenain information publicly ot coursc, such as facts and analysis on policy proposars and decisions, should not iause particurar dirncurties ai trre The Ptobarion Board for Northern. Ireljyrd (pBNI),ooe of the department’s NDpBs, has stessed the imponance of maintaining confidentiality. clienrconnairtiaity ir to the Board’s and PBNI have pointed out tbe risk of releasine informadon could rreip "L"iui indire.tly towork Decisiom abour rerease of particiurar inform"ri*which ;iii ;;;;;I#ii? oit""Jy or"ureruny uaancea.ro*ary ri,olraii"lr. PBM have also raised concems.about emergence of a prcscnptlve approach FOL The departnent would hope to address this tlx’ougtfpossible the centrar c5-ordination itr trr"’e,bi ,iirl"iri], iito iriiai"g flexible guidance incorporating an elemcnt of iiscretion tf,rougt "nO 2’, will the-exemption Provisions in.the white Paper provide held by your department, hich you think need to bi pirened?suficient protecrion to the kinds of inlormation The department considers tbat the exemption provisions will, in most cases, provide sufficient protection (see answer to Ouestign 3).

an"it"ul.","

,

.

the_

."n.r

-nainrrg.

""

t" "ioitr", iii"’** a"ti",,p"" Jepail;#;ilH;,ii:


-

bq-lt.

\

i3ry:: il"-

proPerty recoro holdings? Would not a comprehensive tti"e the potential to

066

Oral

IO JUNE 1998

Oral Answets

1065

draft-

to gettt*theu""n takenBillthatonwill have delayed lnbook. I amo*1i3" any

for inclusion in t"’t consideration of ili;’i’f; "ppi"pti"tt costs in use’ increase occupancy rales *av Au"^" later Year’ ;i;;;. Qulen’s ;;ittd;* services t : l b : : f . " Gentleman tqyassets Kitfoyte: hon as Mr. regtsrer’ national \\hat it * ,ttui",rt"* year’ Bob Bli’zard covemment ,he 9. Mr. November p"lii.rt"d t"*i""tt;;5:Jl: .on ** iirti.’tt o"tivery are tn" holdings’ ltoptu" n". " . t assels. ,it"* il;it’;i elderly. t*"met are’^cceisible to ;ilffi;;; public. ;; Ofrice of Public SecretarT’ The Parliamentary weet<’ we ( f- ovle): t a s i s"#i" i l ’ i " ] i " L t Frceilom ot Information progranm’bl b"::i for I r , . u"Liiou"*..nt services foioldil q*p\views p"blic a ;;;;; will to their ano 8.Mr.Ivor needs. SPeech

to the Public?

The

thing the initially 24 including DroDertv and

.’-; ’r; ; T-

C.L-.A.- i"ti.t-t.’,i , - ti’" -o1.

Caplin (Hove):lf he

last the wider

to

the

that teglslaqon this

ElderlY PeoPle (Waveney): of

i * ? * i l * u " i ’ , i . i t -o{ ""."*igt.g Mr,il.ir-" .ri"rii, H;"";"dr"d: ot- ’ -UrOo,,l*.-,il"i ,t’iy ;ill *itJrltin" " ,1". w.i0 -I

ProPosals

launched which

older people

make statement

on Public seiect comminee theGou"tn’n"ncs proposals for^a on tht t435021 Act (HC398)’

.listening their contributio[ recognising

and ;;#ii#ffi information to: ir"Jom of the bener gov-emmen: I welcome Btizzard: 28 pilot schemes .have the when pr"rect’ LPcast:l ,4 Tbe Chanceltor ofwlcome the Duchy the best examples be rolled out corffnittee’s repon’ I gen"raltheendorsement our nationwide? a clearof information Act’ rhe repon.rs outfteedom from-time people in my constiruency complairDepanments we ;;;;;;i; and Govemment to plocess written have consultation overall ,o the in I’tlu .r"rn"n, a reply have encoumged them to make committee’s detarreo ,rttougtt me’ but I have sometimes had to wart

dJ<’rt rp"."b"Ja cr""U i", il"ill;t&"’Ji a recommenda$ons careruttY’ and then not received for a reply’ -Before ;""tit il’;;h; the House’ to came I Minister’ reponPAC lhe from ;J"il;;;J;t I quote states: Caplin:"Oh!"]-which Mr."A MrFrsets: iriui" r r"athathadit to publish :$ a cerarn il:".*iil made within [HoN. replies " itit."""*" league lnformarion introducing consider "f Friend i;n’ f t t r i t t lliir] that thev would so Departments’ We are allowed to quote i; i;i; ’6; ;-."t timesl Freedom of

had

Act is ldng overdue

v"I-:l:

reply within specified thgold:".1l Order’ onHontheMembers’ Madam Speaker: tne ot Modemisation answer to my hon Friend’s tu"’rlptn Kilfoyle: The short "lint Conuniftee no’ simplv tables.likeis$’irh House of Commons’ i""gue like Nevertheless coriparing know beet should ’the that has alwavs iraterial ConservativeorMembrs Caplin: rule? Tory of years 18 to hon Members rePl.ies of ?ffrciency better. ls that nott symPtomancthe chancellor of the Duchyso’ puutiih for rhe frstandtime the figure onan i’i"na 40 or the pubtic sovemment assurance that the rePort’s ot fteedom it is tru on Friend’s question’from conclusionsconsideration hon my and pan of the fitst On in the to be leamed thosth given th lessons the out *irifreedom of information Bill? then’ we are networkingwanted I )il’ the other 26 authorities that but with i[ the coul Pilot scheme’ an advennrrous Clark:I am panicularly impressed by ii "’"i’rt oari’"Tea the schemes rhe first two year for out roll : rarsed D ;i also benefit from the good practtc issues that have not been following h:;J;;t Denineot comments on coverage in Scotland-frdo* ol and chislehurst)r lf leag’ ;h; Forth Brornley. Ericgood schools’ wl enough for hosPiuts and DePanme information and data Protecuon n: for.Govemment eno’’ughquesdon. my thinking. g*d fro^ Minister excelleni ,rtE(litr’ lt?" Y:Tl ani consr( (Caithness’Sutherland will the !h: Bliz;rd)’ Robrt Maclennan the on\v nor that hr that letters accePt ministerial of chancellor the #il get that are not signed bv t PPpr" ilt the irnprove and PaDer’ back .qualitv :1,i:il;;; it and hope Minister? co his Personal white ^ the ri recall crossing swordsofwith Kilfoyle: I the past on the-subject league tab dmerable on innoducing tegtstat goal of operung up tron. ln centred ,tte doveinment’s that the argument comparisons meaningtulMember for waveAr decision making. were E leno ihe non’cannot has a long record compare unlike Depart’mr Clark: The right hon Gen’leman nri"rarOl,’on" iiuir. cornments kind me comparisoni would not be valid’ t" li .,riO earlieri one inhisthe House is keener tnan ii’ii

Mr. o";,.ion;;’"i lii.Je’;;ittht"c ,-rufO’toi*’u..it" Mr. itn, J"uirti.[ #;;;"[ th".iv *t ;;.;;;;;*"’bitween ot’l-*""rl.e’r?iu" ;;il;""d;,";"t i"iJ#i""" ,h""*loili.tt^fi’i"ff t".,-i."t.r’t " iDr,".,1" .f " u" -utmost co"n.i,iJi-l"pln’.becausei:l"JA.TPl-ltJ,ffi r.,’ua. #".iffi ;";d *t""."luti*-thiP"btt**n Mr. ;i;;’;; iFir"*i"g "’ ui.t ""i Mr. i;’ii;;";v o"ifitftitg’-""do*ilv ,i," p-podion u’,nro’t I1"^#lgi:TiiJflf ’N.i;;;;d 61,o"’in..i;ij,’D*; ; ;;’# ;’si"ffi; ; :{::-’,,H’i:oi:,r*f:,[" #: ii""Mr.*Cr.iri-f*."niJ-r lJti.i.’*,i" L-i" .itlv * i . , i t " i lii’tlii"oii,’*" Dr.;i-;;;’ldfireciate l-repe-at " "l-",ti’i.

"-*it

-e"f-"

-boultl *’

(

* -no

*t

5.r2 CO|34’ORAUT

-always


HOUSE OF COMMONS

SESSION

1997_98

wHo10454 I

ilil lilillillil ill llil illillililfi ffi

SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC

ADMINISTRATION Third Report

YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW: THE GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSALS FOR A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT Volume I Report and Proceedings of the Committee toeether with Minutes of Evidence

Ordered by TheHouse ofCommons to be

25-s-

u,qtn tlrrni

19 May 1998

LONDON:THE STATIONERY OFFICE

f.

398-l

|950

t-

. ’ .- r’), ., i,* ., [r{i., r

F

tt

se


THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLTC ADMINISTRATION

Medical Practices Committee 55.56.54.National Mehopolitan Police Committee Institute for Biological Control 57.58.Police Negotiating Board Health Laboratory Service. 59.60.Secretary Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee (RWMAC) to Central Advisory Committee on War pensions . Trent plc . {1.62.63.-Sevgrn Yorkshire Water . Water Services Association e,astgrn Group plc !!.65.67.66.Northern Electric plc Hyder plc Wales Electricity Board) . South Westem Electricity plc Electricity Association Cenhica plc 69.68.70. British Energy plc . 71.72.PowerGen Stewart Ashurst, ChiefExecutive, Essex County Council. 73.74.Katrine David Radford, ChiefExecutive, Somerset County Council S-!orle,Council ChiefExecutive, Basingstoke Deane Borough Council . 75.76.Dundee Manchester Council Scottish Borders Council 77.il l"{tt Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council . 79.80.Professor Dr Ross Anderson . Vemon Bogdanor 81.82.Centre for Utility Consumer Law Des McConaghy 83.84.James Michael. Mrs Jane Pearson Dr David Clark . Electronic Data Limited. 86.87.85.Group Limited. Newspaper Society. Royal Historical Society. 89.90.88.Defence Le-ague of British Pensioners War Veterans (DpV). Borough of Hackney. Warwickshire County Council 91.British 92. for Adoption Fostering 93.94.NationalAgencies Foster Care Association Ministry of Defence. 96.95.Northem Ireland Office

. .. . . . . ... . . . . .. .. . Standards and

..

Public

the

(CAC)

and SWALEC (South

.

City City

4

and

.

and Syslems

..

.... and

and

Shelter

97.98. David Davies, Chairman, Advisory Committee on Business and the Environment Robert Hazell 99. Intervention Board

108 109

l0 12 l5

u6

lt9 120 120 121

1.tt126 t26

130

l3l

132

t34 r36 138

139 140 140

l4l

142 144 145 145 148

tfu

153 156 161

162

r64 r68

168

t7l ttL

I IJ

174 175

176

t78 180

t80

190


THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ADMINISTMTION

ACCESS TO INFOR}IATION AND TTIE RIGIIT OF PRIVACY One ofthe most difficult and crucial issues that the Freedom of Information Act needs to address is the extent to which the public’s right of access to information may ovenide the individual citizen’s right ofprivacy. Some ofthe issues ofconfidentiality involved are illustrated in the box This is the least satisfactory aspect ofthe proposed It has been seriously complicated by the fact that there are three pieces oflegislation which deal with these matteri which have been, or are to be introduced separately: the Human Rights Bill; the Data Protection We have serious doubts that the regime proposed Bill; and the Freedom of Information |

0.

Act.

below.

Bill.

strikes the right balance between privacy and openness, or indeed whether it will be

workable.

PRMCY VS TIIE RIGHT TO KNOW:WIIAT SORT OF

INFORMATION RAISES THESE PROBLEMS? carers do not have the legal right ofaccess to the records ofthe children and young "Foster people in their To give carers direct access would not only conflict with the rights of children to confidentiality, but also would not be practicable because ofthe nature ofthe Social Service Departments (SSDs)have a statutory duty to pass on all ofthe information that carers need to care for each child in However, in practice, social workers make decisions about what information it is appropriate to pass on, and what is NFCA often hears from foster carers who find that crucial information about the child and his or her circumstances is not passed In the worst scenario, a foster carer may welcome into their home a young person who has already abused other children, without being told of National Foster Care Association. In a judgment in March (R v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and others ex parte P.Thorpe and another), Lord Woolf decided that the police had acted lawfully in informing the owner of a caravan site ofthe presence there of a couple who had been released after serving prison sentences for sexual offences against children. The Times 19 March 1998,

records... not.

care.

placement...

this".r6

on.

p.5.

The fees earned by individual barristers from legal aid have hitherto been treated as confidential.largest But in April I998 payments to the 20 solicitors’ firms and 20 banisters who received the sums ofmoney fiom the legal aid fund in were pubtished by the Lord Chancellor’s Department. HC Deb 28 April 1998, 311 cols Do the press or public have a right to know the whereabouts ofhigh profile prisoners, or is this personal information which should not be released? Should a doctor be allowed to warn a patient that his or her partner is HIV positive, without the patient’s consent? Should employers be able to ascertain whether ajob applicant has a criminal record, by requiring the applicant to request a copy ofhis or her own criminal record and then produce it to the employer "enforced subject access")?

1996-9765-71Y.

(so-called

rbEv,

p.124-


THE SELECT COMMITIEE ON PUBLTC ADMTNISTRATION

l.

I In most countries which have separate privacy and Freedom oflnformation regimes, there is an inevitable conflict between the two competing values. The story of the relationship between the two in Australia and New Zealand indicates the possible results: has had a relatively weak Privacy Commissioner, who has not established a "Australiaaccess regime under the 1988 Privacy Act; who has not succeeded in extending the separate privacy legislation to the private sector; and who has acquiesced in FOI being the goveming statute. In New Zealand by contrast the Privacy Commissioner has been highly effective in arguing for the separate access regime in the new Privacy Act 1993; and in upholding privacy Freedom of Information observers remark on the chilting effect which the as a Privacy Act is beginning to have on Freedom of Information disclosures and on information policy more generally. In part this results from public ignorance or misinterpretation ofthe provisions of the Privacy Act; but in part it is because the Privacy Commissioner is an

value.

effective ooeralor".r7 The box opposite summarises the relationship between privacy and Freedom of Information regimes in other countries.

Protection for the individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s right ofprivacy 12. The UK does not have a single law defending individualsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; privacy; but two Bills currently under consideration deal with privacy rights. The first ofthese is the Human Rights Bill, which will make provision in order to give fullet effect in UK domestic law to the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 8 of the Convention says that: (a) "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his

correspondence.

with the exercise ofthis right except (b) There shall be no interference by a publicandauthority such as is in accordance with the law is necessary in a democratic society in the ofthe country, interests ofnational security, public safety or the economic for the prevention ofdisorder or crime, for the protection ofhealth or morals, or for the

well-being

protection ofthe rights and freedoms ofothers". The freedoms in Article 8 are balanced by the freedom of expression in Article l0 of the Convention which includes the right to receive and impart information.

lTEv- p.188.


THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

14.FreedomOnofthelnformation and these two pieces of legislation inevitably pull in different directions. one hand, there is a risk that by taking a liberal approach to Freedom of Information the UK may find itself in breach ofArticle 8 ofthe European Convention on Human Rights. On the other, there is a risk that over-scrupulous concem for privacy may prevent the disclosure of information of legitimate concem to the public. The Lord Chancellor sought to reassure us about the conflict between the Convention and the Freedom oflnformation Act: ’the important thing, I think, is that the Human Rights Bill represents a floor ofrights; it does not

fall.

represent a maximum ofrights, it is a floor ofrights beneath which people should not These are minimum However, there is nothing in the Human Rights Bill which prevents the freedoms and rights of individuals.being enhanced above that This is exactly what the Freedom of Information Bill does".re We agree with him on the Article 10 side, but whether that solved the Article 8 infringement problem is another matter. It might be added that the Council ofEurope, which is responsible forthe Convention, in l98l recommended to Member States that they implement Freedom of Information laws.z0 The difliculty for Freedom of Information represented by the Data Protection Bill is not easily assessed. In any conflict between the two regimes, the Data Protection Bill may well take precedence, because it is derived from European Community The Data Protection Registrar, Mrs Elizabeth France, argued that "there would be recourse to the European Courts directly if we were to deny people the rights which were contained in the Data Protection BilP’.2r If the Freedom of Information Bill were not drafted so as to be compatible with the Data Protection Directive, she courts would make it clear if challenged that in the case of an individual the Data Protection Bill’s requirements would be the ones which took precedence".2r Furthermore, the Registrar gave us an indication ofwhat her approach will be and freedom of information: in cases relating to to finding a balance between privacy information supplied in confidence she was, she said, likely to "start from the position that processing such data in order to disclose it without the consent ofthe individual or some riding compelling public interest (such as the saving of life or the prevention or detection of serious crime)is either unlawful or unfair processing ofpersonal data it is wrong to have to satisry any test of harm in order to protect personal records from disclosure to third parties. Indeed, there is a strong public interest in preserving the privacy and confidentiality of individuals [which] will only be ovenidden (in the absence of consent) on limited compelling grounds ofpublic interest or for the protection ofthe vital interests of individuals".:r On the other hand, the provisions in the Data Protection Bill appear to allow for the disclosure of information withoutthe consent ofathird parfy ifit is done "underany enactment", which would presumably include the Freedom of Information The White Paper seems surprisingly phlegmatic about the possibility ofconflicts about the disclosure ofpersonal information and their resolution. It says that the unlikely event of a dispute arising between the Commissioner and Registrar, on which they were unable to reach agreement, this would ultimately be resolved by th courts".2a This may be true, but strikes us as an abdication of responsibility for drafting clear legislation, which avoids recourse to the courts except where

rights.

floor.

15.

law.

said,’te

over-

.

"in

Bill.

unavoidable.

16. The right to privacy has a head start; the Government should ensure that the right ofaccess

to information is not left behind. We accept the Data Protection Registrar’s view that preserving the privacy and confidentiality of individuals is a vital interest, which should be overridden only on careful consideration and for good reasons. But there must be a mechanism to ensure that it can be overridden where necessary and in a systematic In the absence ofajoint Data Protection and Freedom oflnformation regime,there needs to be careful consideration to ensuring a proper balance between the two values of privacy and openness which does not stifle Freedom of Information early We recommend that the Government clariff to what extent it believes that the Data Protection Bill will work to prevenl access

way.

on.

llq zsr of Ministers of the Council of Europe R(81) 19, ’"Committee

-Q.2torf.,e"- n". z.z.

:lQ.zlo; se aho Ev,p.154, ,if;in

I se,


THIRD REPORT FROM

by tbird perties to informrtion about an individual, and how it is proposed that the Data Protection Bill is to provide the protection for the individual’s right to privacy against the

right to information held by the Government.

Access to persorul information Besides protecting the individual’s rights of privacy, the Data Protection Act is also the vehicle for a certain type of Freedom of Information. The Data Protection Act 1984 gives individuals the right ofaccess to information relating to themselves which is held on computer. are also to gain the right of access to information Under the new Data Protection Bill they relating to themselves held in ordinary (or "paper" or "manual")files. The Box opposite shows the main provisions conoerned). The Freedom oflnformation Act, when enacted, is, in addition, supposed to give individuals another system of gaining access to information which directly The Govemment has argued in the White Paper that it should therefore be relates to possible for anyone to find out what is held by public authorities about themselves under either There would in other words be the Data Protection Act or the Freedom of Information considerable overlap between the two regimes: they will, according to the White Paper, cover the same ground in providing access for an individual to data held about them by public This raises the possibility of a confusing and messy patchwork of different authorities. provisions under which one may obtain access to one’s own How the system works for individuals is crucial: overseas experience suggests that a great majority ofrequests are likely information. The White Paper suggests that these problems can be to involve personal overcome. It says that "as far as is practicable, we will align the systems for access to personal information under Data Protection and Freedom of Information. This is likely to include the In addition the Govemment means of access, time limits for reply, charges and proposes thatpublic authorities willhave a duty to ensure that any significant difference between the two regimes is made known to any applicant who might be aflected by such a difference".25 The access rights in the two pieces of legislation, however, will be very different. The Freedom of Information Bill will allow access to all records; the Data Protection Bill as introduced will allow access only to computerised, or "structured" personal aranged "either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that particular information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible" The two pieces of legislation will have different exclusions and exemptions. For [clause data processed for purposes of the prevention or detection of crime, the example, personalprosecution ofoffenders, or the assessment or collection ofany tax or duty is apprehension or right of access to personal data under the Data Protection Bill in any case exempt from the would prejudice those purposes [clause straightforward exemption where disclosure based on atest ofharm. Underthe Freedom of Information Bil[ some of the same data may be prosecution and functions ofthe completely excluded as information relatingto the investigation police, prosecutors and other bodies carrying out law enforcement work; or it may be exempt enforcement or encourage the because it could "substantially harm the effectiveness of law avoidance or evasion oftax"; or it may be disclosed because it would not cause substantial harm the or because it was in the public interest to disclose Again, under Data Protection Bill, a Minister will be able to issue a certificate exempting certain descriptions ofpersonal data from most ofthe provisions ofthe Act on the grounds ofnational security; there will, however, be an appeal to the Data Protection Tribunal on the grounds that the decision to issue the certificate was not reasonable [clause The same information could be totally excluded from the Freedom of Information Bill, and therefore placed beyond the possibility of reference to the Information Commissioner, because it relates to the security services; or it could be exempt under the "national security" specified interest. An individual searching for personal files is likely to be left bewildered. Just as likely, the Information Commissioner and Data Protection Registral5 may make incompatible decisions in similarareas. The Data Protection Registrar told

17.

them.

Act.

file.

appeals...

18.

files-information

l].

28]-a

it.

27].

4.1

l.

z5oara 26ihe Data Protcction Rcgistrar will become the Data Protection Commissioner under the provisioN ofthc the sake of simplicity, the Office is rcferrcd to as the Data Protection Regislrar throughout this Rcpon,

Bill. For


THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Protection regimes in order to make a more coherent and more workable system for access to persotral information. We are most unhappy that the Government has been so vague about the relationship between the Freedom of Information proposals and the Data Protection Bill, and that it seems that it has not until very recently got to grips with the problems involved in reconciling the It is essential that the conflicts we have identified There must be a simple and comprehensible system for are resolved, and resolved individuals to gain access to their own information, which avoids the complexities presented by differing access regimes and ensures that the right ofaccess is effectively enforced.

soon. two.

Third party appeals The White Paper asks for views on whether a mechanism should be established to allow third parties to appeal against decisions to release information which they believe would cause "substantial harm" to their interests.32 As the Data Protection Registrar pointed out, Article 6 ofthe European Convention on Human Rights says that the determination ofhis civil rights within a reasonable time by an independent everyone is entitled to a fair and public and impartial tribunal established by [t seems difticult, therefore, 10 prevent such a system ofappeal even if it were wished to do We agree that a system ofappeals for third parties is essential, This does, of course, cause a number of practical problems. DSS have a great difliculty with it: the process of providing access to records could be complicated and delayed ifthe third party or parties had to be consulted aboutthe release of their information in each "The Department will therefore be keen to explore the scope for procedures to avoid,

..

22.

"in he_aring law"."

so.

case.

as much as possible, the need to contact third parties at the time an access request is made. Letting third parties know in advance that information may be disclosed could be one way Where a third party is aware ofthe possibility ofdisclosure there should be no need for firrther contact following an access request".3a DTI make a similar point: "we would not wish, in the extreme,to be required unnecessarily by the Act to ask third parties whether they would object to the disclosure of information which they had provided to the Department in circumstances where the information was manifestly suitable for public consumption (eg was already in the public domain) and where the third party clearly could have no sustainable objection to its further promulgation".rt It may be diflicult to find the third party concemed;the public authority may not have a contact address for the person. Appeals would negd to be heard before disclosure, and there may, in some circumstances, be compelling reasons to release We are also concerned about the possibility of information before an appeal can be dealt accidental or wrongful disclosure ofcommercial or other confidential information which causes damage or distress, and the legal implications this would It is not clear from the White Paper whether this possibility has been fully considered.

forward...

with.

have.

EXCLUSTONS

23.

The White Paper says that Freedom of Information "as a fundamentalelement ofour policy to modemise and open up govemment, should have very wide application".K The proposals are, it claims, designed to replace the previous "piecemeal and inadequate system with clear and consistent requirements which would apply across government".rT We have been impressed

of the White Paper’s commitment to Freedom of Information. But this has made the Government’s decision to exclude certain bodies and classes of information altogether from the scope ofthe proposed Act all the more regrettable, This means that the information will not be accessible at all, unless it is voluntarily made public or is required under other statutory provisions; there will be no opportunity to request the information or to weigh the public interest in its provision against the public interest in withholding The Information by the breadth

it.

":’Ev,"pata"Min-Ev. p.14.p.10.ofEv.2.t. p.60,para.8,3. paftL

l.o.


Tl.tE SELECT COir.’IMITTEE ON PUBLIC ADMINISTMTION

Information is unlikely to be among its first priorities. It may be some time until it enacts lesislation about Freedom of Information. The Lord Chancellor, in evidence to the Committee, aciepted this point;?3 and we believe that the degree to which Freedom of Information should cover Scoftish authorities should not be left in such doubt. The Scottish Consumer Council, in their submission to the Cabinet OfIice on the White Paper, point out that there is a further source of confusion in the fact that Data Protection (across all departments) is a reserved matter, for which the Westminster Parliamentwill continueto be responsible, whileFreedom of Information (in relation to matters) is not.74 They also raised a concem that there might be differing provisions in Scotland and in the rest of the UK:"it will clearly be unsatisfactory if Scottish citizens do not have access to the same categories of information on the same basis as We do not regard it as unsatisfactory for the Scottish citizens in other parts of the Parliament to be able to introduce differing provisions for Scotland to those ofthe rest ofthe UK;that is the nature ofdevolution. The rights ofthe Scottish Parliament to accept or to reject the provisions should be preserved. We do believe, however, that there needs to be a system which can be used to facilitate the application ofthe Act in Scotland as soon as possible. We recommend that there should be provision to ensure that the Actwill be brought into effect in Scotland in relation to devolved matters as soon as it comes into effect in the rest of the UK, to ensure that there would not be a lengthy period in which Freedom of Information will not apply to devolved matters in Scotland.

non-reserved

UK’.

,GATEWAY"PROVISIONS

47.

The White Paper sets out a series ofwhat amount to conditions for requesters: "applicants will be encouraged to act reasonably and not abuse or misuse the access rights that the Act

provides".75

Making a request As noted above, the White Paper says that there are a number of circumstances in which the authorities subject to the Act will not necessarily be required to deal with requests in the public interest tests and then taking a normal way, by assessing them against the harm andThese circumstances would include, for decision to release the information or not to release instance, cases where the information was already available, or where the information would be published in due course; where the request was not specific enoughto allow the body concerned "fishing expedition"’, or the request appeared to io look for it; or where related material. and so multiple applications for We accept that some such defences for the bodies subject to the Act are necessary’ There may well be vexatious requests, and it should not be the role ofauthorities to provide routinely information which could be easily obtained fiom (for example)a public library. But the option be an excuse for indefinite delay ofnot releasing information if it is likely to be published couldguidelines; and the option of not in permitting access, and will need to be subject toa deiling with a request if it is suspected that it is simply "fishing expedition", oreven an attempt to "obitruct or intlrfere with thepublic authority’s business"T? could be misused by some bodies, which might be too quick to make inaccurate assumptions about the nature ofan application or the intentions ofan applicant. These provisions need, therefore, to be balanced by provisions During our requiring bodies subjeclto the Act to help applicants find the information they visit to lieland, we heard how its Fresdom of Information Act required bodies subject to it to publish guidance records, and also to and intemal publish general guides to their role, operation or rules ihey A good deal of the second type of material has already been made available under the Code of Practice. But the first type, the general guide to the role, operation and

48.

it.

be-a

on.’o ’large-scale

49.

cle_ar

want.

hold.

’-llq.:sr -.Epavf.a.p.l8l.t.zt. ’"owa.2.26. 77itia.


T1IIRD REPORT FROM

not.

records ofthe body concerned, has we recommend that bodies subject to the Act shoutd be obliged to publish a detailed booklet covering the role ofthe body, how it ihe type of records it holds, and its policies on disclosure ofdocumenb dno tn"t tn"y ,nlur’J be under a sJatutory duty to advise and assist requesters to narrow ana ainne tli information lhev want campaigx for Freedom oflnformation proposes that the public should be given access to intemal indexes held by the authority. lt atso suggests ihat authoriries available an index to the records they have released in riiponse to Freedom or requests, and copies ofthose records; and that authorities shbuld be requirea to provia" putuc reading rooms where such information, as well as the guides and manuals whos; discloil;;i; proposed in the white Paper, could be inspected. AII ofthese proposals are reasonabi" Ib; major govemment departments, for example, or locil authorhies. ,nav ue tiss practicable torsmaller bodies such as schools or smalladvisory Affangementjforthese could no doubt be made, however, through larger bodiis,NDpBs. for example departments or local authorities concerned, oi else ipplicants might be allbwed to the establishment concerned to review the Govemment it slggestion that bodies to which the Act applies should be obligedfhe to creute inaex"s tt do not already exist. Dr clark did say to us, however, that depa-rtments for ihiii owi convenience to work out some form of index or list and iftiey do that then want certaintv iiwoutJ be my intention that that information itself will be subject to freedom of recommend ihat public authorities should be required available existine indexes to their records, where it is practicable to do sofshouldtobemake to create new recordsg and should be encouraged to create indexes forrequired old records. acc"ot tt this need not be in the Bill itself, but we recomnend that authorities should ue orii,’eeJlo prepare a slrategy for cataloguing their The way that information oi indexed is vital to an effective right ofaccess; this is something the importance isofrecorfred was madeclear to us during our visit to Sweden; and we will retum t6 the issue in ou, which reports. It will be essential to make sure that applicants are able to identifo rhe aocuments ttrey aie seeking.

*orr.s,

so.a.nyrh"

,rfufu-;di; Inrormu-tion

bodie-s:

records-ivailable.

..

_

rn"v ;;;, so".*;ini ;;";;;k;;; ,"riit.J

-the

"""

.,mav *tii.i info..uti6n;;.td w" w" ifroexes-to

"l

records.

trtu.e

Fees and charges The white Paper sets out a system of charges for applicants. It points out that Freedom of Information carries costs, and that "every major Freedom of Informition contains provisions for charging". Itdividesthe systems into two types: regime in the;oriJ made each time an application is made and charges for dealing *ith the requesl charsesi increase depending on the amount ofwork required in order to deal with it, ind possiuly aii6 ’operatilony.tt depending on the nature of the requester (whether an individual or a commercial white Paper pro?oses to employ both ofthese. public covered by the Act will be able !9lhare a "limited access fee per request", of noauthoriries more than rhen puuiic authorities will be able to set their own charging schimes,.within parametersf,l0; tald aown’eiflrei in itself or (more probably) an order made under These would exctuae a to make a profit; prevent bodies charging for information which a public is,eluirJ under the Act itselfto make publicly available; and "should be strucrured toauthoriw falt primariiv ttre limited numberofapplications which involve significant additionalwork ana cotisiOeratie in costs. rather than.straight forward application"s which, for public authorities, should be part anJparcei of normal interaction with the public".EI How expensive it likely to be to obtain the information requested? under the code, there is no access fee, but bodies it could make chargei depending on rt"ir required. The charges vary widely between todepartments. They are preseirtea inlhe table on the

51.

flat-rite,,entrvrit,i"t fr*

5,2..The.

the_Act

. 53. l8’’para.2.29. ql’..,-r rez,J!.BO’Ddra,

IDIA.,

it".E’

is.

_subject

po*"i

ti*.


THIRD REPORT FROM

interest.r5r Documents written by third parties (for example the govemment of a Member State) are also excluded from the regime and requests must be made to that third party.r5z Could the EC regime inform the approach of UK authorities to such requests when made to the UK of the document? Or would the EC regime influence the attitude of UK authorities in ’author’ result in a less releasing otler EC documents in their possession? If so, then this will.probably liberal initude than under the proposed Freedom of Information Bill.’1r The EU Ombudsman a to range bodies, de wider ofEC including has managed by negotiation to exten d the Code facto the EC Parliament and the ECJ is discussing a possible extension of the European Code to its jurisdiction the within the European of documents even though the latter is not that a own failure to adopt proper rules on access (The European Ombudsman has said Ombudsman. The Amsterdam Treaty elevated the to maladministration)’ information could amount toFreedom of Information question to a Treaty provision (new Article 255)stating that principles and limits would be set out in an act made under Article 251 and each institution covered by the Parliament would elaborate speciftc provision: the Council, Commission This will take several years to achieve and there is orovisions in its own Rule ofProcedure.rsa no guarantee thatthe regime will be any more liberal than at present’ W visited Sweden inMay in order to discuss this point (among others), and we will retum to it in our next report on the

and_the Euro-pean

draft

Bill.

PUBLIC RECORDS

98.

The Freedom of Information Act, the White Paper says, will have a considerable impact possesses the right ofaccess to govemment system. The public already on our public records Records Acts 1958 and 1967. The right applies to recordi over 30 years old underthethe PublicMost records are, in fact, destroyed: onJy a small central govemment bodies and courts. old percenttge ofthe records,created by govemment are transfened to the Public Record Oftice and

preserved permanently.r"

Paper considers whether it should be necessary to uniry the systems ofaccess 99,The White less than 30 years old-and of access to older records. It proposes records-those to,.current" that the Freedom of Information Act should cover access to both current and historical material:

.,this will provide a comprehensive right ofaccess to all records, regardless oftheir age". There continue to be different systems of access for current records and historical will, however, Records ofover 30 years old will, as now, be assumed to be open to the public (with records. or "substantial harm" tests). Records that were created more no need may-be to apply the "harm" released before their time; but in general they will g.!ly be available ifthey are recently not subject io an exclusion and if they pass through the harm tests.rr6 100. The White Paper discusses the possibility oflowering the threshold at whioh records pass from being ,,cunent" to becoming "historical". Its conolusion, that "it is preferable to retain the

30 year rule which is in line with intemational practice" is, itwould seem, based largely on the ofaccelerating the process of reviewing old records to determine whether they should be coit preserved as ..historical’r or Changing the 30 year rule to a 25 year rule would cost f,60 million over five years,r5t a cost, the White Paper says, which "would not constitute the best use of scarce public resources".rtE lhe White Paper does, however, commit the Govemment to

not.

313.

tstSee World Wide Fundfor Natxre (WllF)v Comnission 99?l ECR Il, The court of first instance said that reasons have to be givcn iven when ii is decided that mandatory intcrests should prevcnt disclosure l5?See also Declaration 35 ofthe Amsterdam Trcaty, from which it may be infcned rhat the cxclusions will not cover Dalties other than member states. ls3see van der waal u European Commission, Case T 83/96 ( 9 March 1998) on a request for access to documents in the Commission sent by national courts relating to points ofcompetition law and policy |

llJJoaras.6.1-6.4. J6oaras,6.E5v--0.p.84.6-

l5’See also the new Aniclc 207(3).

l57Min of ls8oara.6.5.


THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PTJBLTC ADMINISTMTION

releasing more records earlier than the 30 year threshold. Earlier release is already encouraged under the Code of Practice.rse Some may be withheld for longer, Not all preserved records are opened after 30 and are either retained within departments indefinitely or sent to the Record Oflice but closed for a specified period. In either case, departments have to show that the records comply with laid down in 1993 Guidelines. Documents whose disclosure might criteria for harm the defence,intemational relations, or national security ofthe counby may be closed for up to 40 years; documents containing information supplied in confidence may be closed for periods of up to 100 years; and so The Home Secretary said that the earliest files in existence in the Home Office that were still olosed date from 1874 and concemed files created by the then Irish Secret Police.’uo The White Papet says that these not too be recast to make the dissimilar to the specified interests under Freedom of relationship between them much closer. 102. There is already a system by which it is possible to appeal against extended closure of some documents. Appeal is to the Advisory Council on Public Records which advises the Lord The White Paper argues that this is ineffective; it proposes to direct appeals on Chancellor. public records instead to the Information Commissioner.’u’ We note, however, the point made in evidence to us by the Royal Historical Society, who argue that the Information Commissioner should be supported by professional historical advice in reaching ajudgement on such cases.162 103. Our principal concem about this section ofthe Wlite Paper is about its application to bodies outside central government to which the Freedom of Information Act will apply. The White Paper itself is silent on this; the background paper says merely that "Records of local authorities are not covered by the Public Records Acts: separate provision is made for these records to be made available to the public. It is envisaged that this will continue under FOI".163 This is inadequate in relation to local authorities; and more inadequate in relation to all ihe other bodies cbncemed.It is reasonable that the Public Record Oflice should not become a repository for the records ofbodies not within central government; but further consideration might have been given to whether other bodies ought to be required to meet the standards of central govemment in record keeping, and whether the rights of access given to central govemment records, currently through the Public Records Acts, and in the future through the Freedom of Information Act, should coverthe otherbodies as Lord Irvine referred to such an extension ofthe Act as constituting an "upheaval";run but it is not clear to us why ensuring that central government standards ofrecord-keeping apply to other govemment bodies as well should cause an upheaval. If it is not done, freedom of information will almost inevitably be less effective as it applies to these other bodies. 104.placeTheanWhite Paper also refers to the importance ofproper records management. It proposes obligation on departments to set records management standards", with regard to best "to practice guidance drawn up by the Public Record particularly relating to the implications ofthe new extensive use ofelectronic systems for processing information and for says, "statutory rights ofaccess are oflittle use ifreliable communicating. As the White Paper place, if they cannot be found when needed, or if the records are not created in the first arrangements for their eventual archiving or destruction are inadequate",r65 The Public Record There will Office is only likely to help those govemment bodies which come under its greater the same sort ofhelp among the other bodies to which the be a great may not have been used Act authorities, schools, contractors, the to the discipline which a statutory obligation to keep records requires. lVe recommend that the expertise ald assistance of the Public Record Olfice should be made available to these bodies as well as those which it is obliged to help.

l0l.

years.

non-disclosure

on.

Information-willcriteria- -already

well.

Of ice- -and

ne d- -a applies-local

lJeoaras,

6.7-6,9,

160;t s14

ir iili"* ’o’Ev. r63p.65,D.t68. fn.l8. r

ilb++o ’"’para.6.12.

need-for

utilities-which

remit.


To r,rhom do I talk about "Unideutified rlying Objects?" (MOD)is the Government focal point, The Ministry of Defence exarnines rea6on! However, the reports itthat receives foraironedefences it only evidence whether there is the UKâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s to establish have been penetrated by hostile or unauthorized foreign military evidence potential unless the eightinq reveale of activity. a threat fromitsanprecise external nilitary The Eource, no attempt is rnade to MoD doe6 not provide an aerial determine identification , service in cases where there is no defence interest The MOD focal point for queries relating to the above is: Ministry of Defence (Air Staff) 2a Room I245 Main Building Whitehal l

I

nature.

Secretarj-at

London SW1A 2HB


/

r?/86/ffi

15:ffi

.

-_

tt]. ?13

, ,rnc>t’.o.e,rjt’-.<:G*.^ rtUl-^+ot ,uua\^’,^.*fc-t*f?-Fa’-s:l-;\e--bE-o,-r4A oovcrnmrtporiovoi’uro’i"pottsis*ffi iffi5SF*;j.’;XH*,H1** ilJ;;;ft;d-ii il’ffffid;Hx""*;; c-cta’r’! mffiffiffiffi;;ro,,u . _";l-;"; r; ’fto,it"ffiucbti"e il co.,.*nt*r . ;#;;";Ji *tr"ilffie-6iustiry -19f trtoqnentb adrod Oucofloff tilts tr)l

sP

t(

lill,tD* obi El

ftrdgn milirnfy hdilior,!tuthods0d milbw taomnl cn frou tbreat p6t*nlrt of t broce Unbse the dghpg t*6rlsGie*tt,gg*dd euch wideuce ro attomPt isErds,to doe,s trot fEl th$ investi*Li4’ FE trog@u putlic terotmas requkerl I lffge the smrrte lie$ritb Ure lWoi$ry of Dtdmoo I,eed respamibilfu for Gwcrnment policy m

-({

tfu

Secrstctint (Air St8ff)24 MidstrY ofDeftnoe Room8245 MainBdldinS whirhrll tmdou, SWIAZHB

tho followilg tdffess;I


* ’i.ea,u,y’cnp," .^"j,::". , .*:*:^^’*""of,*ddu, st-.,r mDNJD R0BIN )F

32t

)r,

:e 2l

)y

’n

-

ff:*i

l{iden Ansnrers

’v, whilr jhH*"llffij.#.# "::TlT"1997-9lt prices ildocuments. rhe Deparf,nent ;;-il;;ffi:1"1’," employees ’,u’,ucr ur i:i:" who aliowance

Actual cosr

199l-92 t992-93 t993-94 1994-95

Cottetant price

ar 1997-98 values

13,954,0)0 r3,437,000 12,384,000 12,493,000 12,896,500 r3,043.000 2, t00,000

l |,800,00t1

I1,840,m0

I I,230,00{)

1995-96 t946_97 1997-98

I |

I,500,000 2,200,000

12,700,000 |

2, 100,000

|

^J_T,"9t, ifff ,l"J#."’*:

of rail travel undertaken by civil servants on same period and siven in the same

’or LCS

/’s

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 997-98

at 5,129,660 4,817,745 4,888,864 4,89?,571

4,t,+0.6I 7

Con$unt price 1997-98 taluer

5,767,148

4,49R,253 5,U)2.796 5,020.863

tnd

rce rge

caf

the

not rck ten ivil

for

rty’

94.as

I.y,..:r..l^ll’"ii:._ir,"-p*ini#"i3’

Departnentat Energy Use

ii"."l-rtf,li.-’.n:,u’

the.secremry of State for Defence , , what wasTotheaskquantirv nt (b/. and sas and rci -;;;#ldi:^ieatins’ lishtins powering oi ;’r D-epanment withentoralthe ;,i cost ;lji" r"T.iit#, roJn_fdi (

th i

;

"i7,r.#i.ii,i il{1’;{.f i*f,x?1;-"ft"jJ’"ffii:iff 1’.’f to"tu’ Mr. spelrar: MoD ,, J" iJHji::X,f Jfi.fl a-:,:lql MT"t:" data.However. ir,is .ateri"r llinili;*",

The

’,#

manasement and each major amongsi whose responsrbiliries is the cotiecrion oJ relevanr is ioi hetd cenrrally in the form requesteO unO.orfO U" piuu"iji"j only at disproponionate cost.

.rf" DIr.

Informadon

Sanders: To ask the Secretary of Stare for Defence hjs Department operates a monitoring t persisrent inquirers tbi 4,891,5’73 tJl6:91 Spellar: W do not monitor inquiries in such an exerctse centally, Wepublic senthowever, and ?ercentare changes by year. correspondence from the in the figures totoMinisters to piovided it ain :vnrcn. performance in responding from Te reflected onwards are ai follo*r, comespondenr has persistenrly corresponded with the panicular iisue, and t Jiulo rne tu est possiblea answer. several ro send a. formal 199+95 the 43.8 ir,l :b:.s:rveq 1995-96 rs tarrcn bybyanconrinuing official at Cnde 46.I +J accordance with Exemption 9 of ithe Code ofuUou. unO ln Access,to Govemment Information: Vril;;;; 45.4 vexariqfs requests. u Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence Correspondence th" total number of staff grades emplt.ryed of all 1111.tT by hrs,De.panment; and what percentagi of thesi siaff To ask the Secretary of Srate eligible to claim a car mileagi a.llowance on wrten he reply rhe leneiof l7 for Defence 3l March in each year since Member for Totnes.roabout K Reidt The total number of civilian staff of all Lranmouth Royal Naval 142696l grades employed by the Spetlar: M]office has no record of receiving the ofDefence on 3l March in each year since 1990 Ministry Member’s are list;d in the table. We have, however. now obtained a copy and a replyietter. will be sent as soon as possible. Defence Analytical Servlces Agency r 990 |]9. i00 l99l Alexander: t38.000 To ask rhe of Srareof rhe for t992 if ir: wiI make a statementSecretary 117.300 on the ourcome 1993 \<un,’lucnnrat |]6.r)00 Review the of Defence t 994 Services I brsets haveAnalytical 1995 been set ror the I 18.000 1996 iII 1997 I I t.rxxl The Defence Analytical 1998 O’::::1 105.$0 ser up in 1992 and the euinquennial REvieri has now been completed. The Evaluation For each year, all staff with a valid driving licence and vehicle insurance were J:"r:f mileage a cat claim eligible to P,uvlorng its customers wirh an improved"ffstandard of t6t ct! t?.r PAc l/l l

. ,#:1994-95-il"l p,:"ges,

("i

,Mr.

wre_

Dr.

1990.

informarion. .*ar.ira’oi do, rn;; . it. rVt*."’l :::lTl","*on. ::p"{,**, t;*, ;;;;’,’# ;:TtJ:,Iol,[ffU.rn :T:; c-onespond"n.". Jo..irlon t"r.f o, p.r;ti;;; ;;

, ^-.Mr.

196-97 t99?-98

rts

does

hold such

(a)Car mileag clains prt4

(b)Cost oJ rai! fares

by

5

l-rl555J

u.

,non..1 . , t,Tn,plans-to Mrs. Cr"y;;;’;l M.rJ ;om-;;;; College. ,^Mr. non. ,Xllli.! .,^Mr,,2.

?-1.900 ff:ili’t’J,"Lll1trtev .6rn ,h?:."Reid: *u, :;:I^]

il,.:,: ^:f".,1.I ;;"."ir"rii’’,[Tl*r;’:’’,X’jj’i]il

. -,.",

L::iJ:"i;


,o Following media reports of an explosion on 26 October Lgg6,

mid-air corrision north of the Butt of Lewis,an extensive search of the area carried out initially

att.ributed to a

v/as

by RAF and coastguard search and Rescue assets but was later abandoned after it became cLear that no aircraft had been reported There was no evidence to support any of the media theories about tlle

.

cause of the incident

overdue.


r-

a

SUBSIDIARY POINTS Mlitary Task 9 is to maintain the integnry of the uK’s airspace. This require,ment is met by the continuous recopised air picture (radax)and an air policing capability. Any threat to the UK Air Defeirce Region would be handled in the light ;f the paticula circumstances at the tif,e (it might, if deemed appropriatejnvolve the soambling or diversion of RAF air defence aircraft). Alleged sightings sent to us are exemined, but consultation with air defence staff and others as necessary is considered only where there is suffrcient widence to suggest a b,reach of UK air space. OnIy a handful of reports have been received in recent years that warranted any firther investigation and no evidence was found of any threat. Where tlere is no evidence in a report of deforce concern, no action is taken to try and identifr what might have been From the types generally receivd aircraft or uatural phenomena probably accountofdescriptions for most ofthe

* * *

seen.

obsewations.

*

Sec(AS)2 is the Air Staff Secretariat. It deals with a wide range of RAF-related issues. It also acts as the focal point within MOD for the Govemment’s limited interest in ’UFos’. A 24-horu’ answerphone is provided so that members of the public can telephone through sighting reports. Reports made elsewhere, either to military establishments, air traffic control centres or ttre police

civilian are forwarded to Sec(AS)2. Some 230 sighting reports and 250 leuers were received last year

*proximity Wbere a military or civilian pilot considers his aircraft has been endangered the of another aircraft (including any flying object he is unable to identifu), or by

in regulated ainpace where an Air Traffrc Controller believes there has been the risk of a collision, the pilot or ATC would be obliged to file an airmiss report (Airprox).


DAILY MAIL

l5llll99

byrhe Civit rtvir tionrtH,rhority

by

NICK

$liH:{f3LT:ilLT*H’hT.i

POPE $iffii;*mfr?Htrfi angular movements. sharp, were visible for Tte objects tg/o to three hours. occasion- ffi’lHeBsiiffffitlrstl aUy nashing down beams of energy. Radiation llghf or were readings subsequently taken &om the landins site to in the forest and were l6und pea* in the ttuee indentations where the cralt had touched doqrn in a clearirg. ’fhere ale nutuber ofin intriguing aeriala encorEters Britaln’s One ot the earliest tooka Dlace tnwasAugust 1956, whensystems tracked on radar RA.F Bentwaters and RA.F atLskenheath lrx Sutrou{. Two RAF jets were bled to intercept the nystery arr energetic game of cralt, mouse ensued cat ardsnd the oilots attemDted to UFO8swas to fhe qulck target. the But too end aglle, and aged to elude the pilots, who and eventudly forcedrar to low returnon tofuelbase. were 40 years lateq a Almost were of RAF Tomado ber the a UFOlets over1990. overtaken North Seabvtn explanation November was No adequate forthcoming. ever also over tfie Lssta year, 900ft UFO was Pursued by two fighter Jets before l! took oEat l?.000mph.are the Moretodisturbing deta! the MoD thal UFos reoorts between wete There civtl aircralt. and two such cases in 1991, boih oYer Kent. ofaBoeing In 1995, the Pilots whal lney ?37 encountered as a brightly Ut UTo described lo approach whtte on theirAlrPort’ and Manchester had it Passed believed that aircm.ft. onlv incideot vards trom Lnvestigated wastheir

#i#itr#"ffit# jei.

omy margrnary It llewsmaler slowlythan Jumbo oviia tlhg base at a beight, oi200ft. a nslrow bearn of lisht ai tuingground, the Founq, before fiylng trylngbE af tugo hlgh ’fhese are thell t.}le of be foundsorts lncidents |ll the MoD! UfOto ttre liles also contatn But of alien abductlons, reports the appeara.uce ofcrop circles mutilations. and ardrnal have been wNch lir*ed allwllhof UFOs.

! e speeospeedso-called X-Eles too.

oOCUMENTS and

photographs detailing UFO investigations in years are Britain over 50 made at last being public for New available undor scrutiny policy of greater Labour’s in Government, openness to rePorts at according the weekand. Here, NICK the Minlstry of PoPE, Defence otficial formerlY responsible for Investigating visltations, terrestrial eagerlY previews the awaited contents.

extra-

inter-

FFICIAL has est in UFOS had more always the do with to than Russians impending any virsit from Martians. for keeping an eye outthat But inSoviet aircraft the air our Drobed routinelv the Cold ltrar’ defences duhng cleat lnal soonwerebecame itthere other more exotrc

-

operaiing in British atr’ craft soace. There has been a sieady Of UFO reports sent stream over ofDetence Mirfstry to thepast Delween

E6-deterririneUK.any

tbreat toforthe90 Pc ofI exDlanatlons wh.lch tumed out toof oblects ordlnary lights,orsaielutes’ ena: aircraft meteors and airships. has always However. of sightl+gs been a bardthere core ur be explaureo that couldn’t where terms,such conventlonal as observers trained have Doticerrnidentified ofdcers and Cralt Pilotsdoing ieen sDeeds our and manoeuwes vay

res-.

Phe-uom’

b-eyond capabi.titiesBlitain s most sensational

1980 h UFo case occurted the Rendlesham Forest,innear USAF/RAF alrbase at wood’ UFO aclidty, bridce in Sulfolk. a series ^or was over Decemoel niEhts. onzoa Datrolmen two on ai2arithen

-witnessed

had vrherL they are

scram-

lock-on

Ses-

nriar-misses

camPamong tour of theliRhts Perimeter rne saw treesbrishl and wenl to investigate. an Iniiially. theY thoughtrunway’ craft had overshol accgm’ wastheno there But a.lthoush they what oanvinE noise. |ike no aircraft they’da 3as/-wa! before: ever encountered triangular la!Ee metallic. chased which ittheY lne ’i"his among betore loslng trees,

8lr-

obj-ect

laier’ nlghts UST two was a stmllar there This time lne sishting. d;puttbasqcog

-tm:l: I#""1iil,;%*s""r"".’;f$ Years the in.rni i l ’ i as in.J’iJFoti’";{,rin{Ytg*fifi :’" ;.T."?8t 113.’"" HrI’ i:;:"ji*nit’uB*i,’iita triangular arrd’rietallic aooearance acc.ess. have ?i’"d. I which . ava!’ snape and eeric promrse I canmaoe abte publicly, reveaF t8-minute exciting revelarrons. some "i^lili,, betweeo conversaiions ’iifr;rhinri -il".’iitape,v,r."1’ask.",3rll’"i::i; ^^hv.rsitions itiev fo{thmoved.movurgto 50

-UFO

if;

which 11aru 6n Yards the 150 wibhin wichin r150 Ughut red and yellow

the MoD to lnvesllgate sucn "Tl’S,?illiT#{,*’f{l’.? in" idpo.t s;vs that,s.ud’ g$i"s?ffi=ry;ffi!:i.t’fr’ g"iifii{in i;5i:ti i iiS:""1’l?n: ’i -.i f n au directions gi

--a fles.

mar- .l croD-circle num- a baseNortl-l Lt-Col

MoD [lE drawn into thein was 1985 6ve debate they ftrst alter I years appearing stalted farmer Middlea when in wallop, Hampshire, found of croD circtes ouintuDlet Armysjrd air tjlameil corps ttre localEdgecombe

A and lnvestisated and submitted rePorts to Bhotographs routlne a MoD, the Prccedure which gave cledence one bui UFO link andMinister to thethat ihen I’rimehad asked tions Ttatcher Marsaletreport on the Phe’ for

auega-

nomemon. I have reviewed all the

circles about theories hoaxes’ are have manycrop and. wNle YeL there aje those wNchexample’ towhybedoexplained; samplesclrcles crop ’genulne’ these cellular chalges. from show disti,nct

for- laK-en

- ,r

Some details of UFO sighting

u


ro -

DAILY MAIL t5/It/99

/,a"

gi:S:-’*:}f"+l,*i;"*

ffiffi g#sti$n":ffi #i,iiffir""’iiflTff::lE

-

srnuceotxNERsa

ffitt’lgffi ’h"ffgi’;g{’"51*""’

Colonel

Conso ctalmed that bodies, and that le d seen the iil"rr"?? Ene technologlcal secrets

f,’"1!""i:1Ttt:

gi:Hif"trr":T."fl public [:i; snonly atter going :?ffi with

lnese so took the secrefs claims, to hls grave. Conspiracy theorists love trus sorttoofbething, are unLikely satisfiedand by anv

The

a-lthouch

Le.ds Rifles

lratnccofofWelat.s Own (cgrment yo.khiFel

lT*llif*lia$r1r,1,"**

- _._

release oftheir papers that ddesn’t support own theorles. But there in thereally LIKthelsn’t anyEr let0er sent from MoD to government the policyin’is1965 adrnits MoD that play down the subject toof IIFOs’. yearsthe My threeinto of ofticial research phenomenon changed myUFO life for into ever. come the Job I’d as sceptic, a came but to believe well be lhat some ItFOs Edsht a.re io bearemade If thesethtu* iles people pubtic,I in for athat, blg surprlse, and believe like me, they willI come to

cover-upU,S.

-#effi _,-

iifltili’$i.,,,llnft ?,"Tlr,i""7

extra-terrestrial

20

Iighland Fietdcrrf( rrrrn-tflg Certrc Association frft#:;idTHffr;.l}fiT


I

,rE*?-,

;usE EI ol ll cl glot !lol

E6t:;:!ig :l

Ilfiiifii

el9l

ltl

Etii

tt,it .’*fu*i *l

ffii;fi?fla3ffi*i,ffis

iiiiifitr+ii*t’t #*fiff’u ffiffigEfrgi:g!:llg:ie::xg

il+l aiffiifil*fit

6 6l ttI 6 !tl

gl


1L

oartot

rf

.ooc

(D

2B ciJ o3G u,l

F

IL o;o

zur

*_:>**.P-

I h; s; 5a!E, llElE.t;!+t i:: :o=53 h;F" aEE+ E3l!43’ lrl{; ETt:.:: !e: ,P .ovE l=;i;;ff;E E.E F s;i:i3 T!;Hl Iz I iit; +Ee I ss girri | ’sgaoiisi I E

B

E

$E


ffixiiilfi i’llgili*i;litit* Iiig’r ruffi iigff ff

-iiiiiii$i** B

II Et


t

Loose Minute D/Sec(AS/6all 8 September 1999 APS/IJSofS

Copy to: AO/AD1

.UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS’

l.

ISSUE

_

’’?T i$-;r"’, %iiu"’ MOD INTERXST

To provide a note on the Depaflment’s interest in

.UFOs,.

RECOMMEND.A,TION

2. note. To

DETAIL

-y

Policy

t:9,:"pent policy thatCivany_il Aviation air defance or air raffic implications of .UFOs, l^tl are a &ater for MOD and the. Authority (CAA)iespectively. MOD,s

to estabrishing from r.pott.J tiihitgs it receives whether the it:yq rr limitedRegion has-beenbreachid by hostitelitiiary activity, and

$IP:F* respondmg to any associated public correspondence.

4’is metMilitary Task 9 is to maintaiu the integriry of the uK’s airspace. This requirement by the continuous recognised air picture qradarl

and an air policing capability. Any. threat to the UK Air DefJnce Region would be(;dled in the light of the particular circumstances at the time (ii migbt, ii involve the scrambling or diversion of RAF air p"opective, reports of ’UFO’sightings are examined, but consultationtn"t with air defence staffand is considered only where there is sufFrcient evidence suggest a or uA a* space: such as reports from credible wimesses (pilots, airtotraffic ,hose supported by photographic, uideoo, Aocom*tary evidence; orare of a phenomenon currently being Yrnesses; l nybef^of therefore, be capable detection. Only a handtul oireporis ff::T::T1Ttght, trave Deen recelved in recent vears in theseofcategories and fi.uther investigation of them has found

::::::.T"i.j::ny l _,: -1. urs.’t

r.#

a"e*"a app-priatg defenc-e arrcrarty-

::T:l^t_T, l l ",l tli"]rE_lt

uo eviden."

of" tloa"t.

Airprox Repons

l;-Y:::*i[:ary

h",

to-

or pilot considers that his aircraft 6gen en.tangercd b] rne proxrmlty of anothercivilian aircraft (including aoy flying object he was unable


UK-document-24-2006-1  

- - - " L s " ’ e - 3? .) 33 ^) e) 4) i S

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you