Personally, I’ve never been in favour of a public inquiry; they rarely are of any use (the period for sanctions on the chief culprits usually long since passed) and they are often hideously expensive.
In the paper, Sir John Gieve, the Home Office permanent secretary, said that upsetting Muslims would be a "potential cost" of ministers agreeing to demands for a full inquiry.
After receiving Sir John's paper, Mr Clarke decided not to order a public inquiry – a decision which infuriated many survivors and relatives of those killed.
There are better ways of getting to the heart of matters, such as use of the FOIA, for indeed, such it was that uncovered this little nugget:
So much for ‘Let justice be done, though the heavens fall’.
Sir John's note, written four months after the bombings but newly-released under Freedom of Information laws, outlines the determination of senior civil servants to ensure that any inquiries into the atrocity were "low key".
It warned of "potential community tension in the event that any inquiry came to be perceived as an exercise in special pleading by one community, or alternatively if it was believed that it focused negatively on the Muslim community".
With the politicised civil service, it seems to always be a case of ‘Don’t mention the
Last night the Home Office declined to comment on the content of the released documents.Clever move. Let the former masters answer for this one….