Gladly, Chair.
One can imagine that if there were not any application of principles at the outset of the exercise, even neutral public servants might be inclined to look at one document and say: “Oh, this will be awkward, and we won't release it, but this one will be all right, so we'll release it.”
That is not the application of the principle of cabinet confidentiality, and it can't be allowed to stand. I therefore gave direction, as every other clerk before me has, to apply the redactions, if there were to be any, on a consistent basis, so that if there was anything that the Prime Minister or ministers had already spoken to, they were to be released. If they went to the core of the issue about timing, about the advice that had been given in this particular case, our bias was to release them.
Now, there might be other principles, such as national security—I don't think it would have applied in the WE Charity case, but it would in others—by virtue of which a public servant might say, “we need to think about this one” or “we need advice on this particular issue”, and such a question would be examined from that point of view.
This is what I meant by a principled approach at the outset.