A quick post about what some of the government’s comms people have been doing regarding the 
mega-embassy cabling risk story. Worth knowing about this, as I believe several ministers will be unaware.
1. After broke the story late last year about the security services objecting to the FIRST mega-embassy application, the Cabinet Office phoned around to say there was no truth in it. This despite the fact that it was impeccably sourced.
2. They have behaved similarly with the and Glen Owen stories, phoning editors and other papers to rubbish the veracity of their pieces.
3. At no point has a public denial been published. This is because the story is true, of course.
4. Now the has confirmed the presence of sensitive cables in scoop today, there can be no more denials, or attempts to call the integrity of journalists into question.
So there’s a pivot.
5. Government will now argue that the risk can be managed. incorrectly asserted today that the cabling issue would “robustly” be dealt with “during the planning process”. But the Chinese application has been submitted and the Planning Inquiry concluded in late February. There can be no amendments to the application at this point unless an *entirely new* application is submitted. So what Kyle said was false. I don’t blame him, this is what he was briefed.
6. If the government decides to try to dig up the cables and move them, it will cost millions in taxpayer cash. The Chinese side refused both of the conditions set out in the letter to the Planning Inspector. There is nothing in their application about either condition and absolutely nothing about the cabling. They’re not going to pay for it. Neither do we want them to pay for it - they shouldn’t have anything to do with sensitive UK infrastructure.
7. has the application and the Planning Inquiry report on her desk. I emphasise again: no changes can be made to this.
In sum: there has been a deliberate attempt to bury the story, to obfuscate, and to mislead, even going as far as to dump on journalists to other journalists (and even their editors) who were doing their jobs.
Wherever you stand on the mega-embassy issue, I hope we can all agree that this sort of behaviour is unworthy of government comms.
mega-embassy cabling risk story. Worth knowing about this, as I believe several ministers will be unaware.
1. After broke the story late last year about the security services objecting to the FIRST mega-embassy application, the Cabinet Office phoned around to say there was no truth in it. This despite the fact that it was impeccably sourced.
2. They have behaved similarly with the and Glen Owen stories, phoning editors and other papers to rubbish the veracity of their pieces.
3. At no point has a public denial been published. This is because the story is true, of course.
4. Now the has confirmed the presence of sensitive cables in scoop today, there can be no more denials, or attempts to call the integrity of journalists into question.
So there’s a pivot.
5. Government will now argue that the risk can be managed. incorrectly asserted today that the cabling issue would “robustly” be dealt with “during the planning process”. But the Chinese application has been submitted and the Planning Inquiry concluded in late February. There can be no amendments to the application at this point unless an *entirely new* application is submitted. So what Kyle said was false. I don’t blame him, this is what he was briefed.
6. If the government decides to try to dig up the cables and move them, it will cost millions in taxpayer cash. The Chinese side refused both of the conditions set out in the letter to the Planning Inspector. There is nothing in their application about either condition and absolutely nothing about the cabling. They’re not going to pay for it. Neither do we want them to pay for it - they shouldn’t have anything to do with sensitive UK infrastructure.
7. has the application and the Planning Inquiry report on her desk. I emphasise again: no changes can be made to this.
In sum: there has been a deliberate attempt to bury the story, to obfuscate, and to mislead, even going as far as to dump on journalists to other journalists (and even their editors) who were doing their jobs.
Wherever you stand on the mega-embassy issue, I hope we can all agree that this sort of behaviour is unworthy of government comms.
