I'm not especially interested in the whoknewwhatwhenandwhy row*; I'm finding it increasingly difficult to be interested in that side of politics; each and every time the patterns seem to be too alike. Which is probably a dreadfully jaded thing to write, haha.
I'm worried about
something though;
We now know that leks were regular, they were not sensitive and there were bo “inducements” by way of Green to persuade Galley to leak.
No, we don't know all of that. We know that this will, presumably, be Galley's defense if "nothing" changes and this gets to court, but that's all. There's no more reason to treat what his lawyer said as
fact than a statement by a lawyer defending someone in an ordinary job of a more, aha, conventional form of theft (though no less reason either).
In any case (and thinking
entirely of what people were arrested under and some of the things that were allegedly leaked), I'm not entirely sure if the issue of things being "sensitive" in a security sense is the main problem (for want of a better word) here; it may instead be what would technically be a minor former of corruption rather than breaching the Official Secrets Act or anything like that. Which may be why the lawyer was so insistent that everything had been done in the public interest (which, going off on a slight tangent, is actually a difficult claim to make for some of the things allegedly leaked IMO).
We'll see, I guess. Though, and I'm saying this in case what I wrote above gets read in the wrong way, I would rather nothing much comes out of the investigation; the possibility of serious damage to the political system could (stress "could") be dangerously real. Hopefully I'm just getting spooked by a shadow.
*Even if some of the issues cast up by it
are interesting; sovereignty of Parliament v equality before the Law, the extent to which policing should be controlled by elected officials, the extent to which policing should be politically sensitive... etc.
