+,, COD I s -t / ~ d~)

anp"oep
q;uaumnoa :;aafqng
rauwng ®Jeis :01
LE-'PL BOOZ hlnf 150 :1ueg
4x!wg o!JpcrD :wo.ij
jautung enzlo
a.~a T210 '01A sasEezzLeza ~- on xej saanoato zi :9ti 20/sz/zz
V00 i - " MOD COSC OIZL OZO %dd LS :LO C0, SOi9Z
26io8 ~o3 o7 :57 FAX o2o 721o 35o3 Cocan [qj UUO

22/08/]3 16 :12 CHEivlERS FFIX UC -) 02L37211G35P3 NO. ee1

In the light of the new evidence from the MoD last night and the BBC mrrn
statement in response we believe we need to see AG, RS and source.

The allegations made by one source througkl the BBC have been at the
centre of the issues we have been addressing. The BBC Governors in their
staternent on Sunday defended the use of single source attribution saying
`Stories based on senior intell sources are a case in point.' RS said on the
Today Programtne `This isn't the BBC own allega,tior. . We are reporting
what a senior intell source has told us.' Tf the individual who has come
forward is the same source as the HBC source then we know now he is not a
senior intelligence source which we believe would be material to our
inquiry.

AG said in answer to John Maples Q422 that he had only diseussed the
WMD Dossier with one source before the story was broadcast. We now
know from the MoD statement that, if this individual is not the source, that
statement cannot be correct . This too would be material to our inqiIiry,

Either way tht-re are important questions that need to be addressed in order
for us to try and resolve this Issue,