Defence written statement – made at on 2 November 2006.
Adam Ingram
Minister of State (Armed Forces), Ministry of Defence
I am today publishing a copy of the findings of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) report into the loss of HMS Sheffield during the Falklands conflict on the MOD's website at www.mod.uk/Defence Internet/FreedomofInformation/. A copy of this paper has also been placed in the library of the House. The published documents include the board's terms of reference, the then Commander-in-Chief, fleet's advice on the report and the Admiralty Board's response.
The publication of these papers follows a review commissioned in the light of continuing parliamentary and public interest in the findings of the report into the ship's loss. The board's terms of reference, the then Commander-in-Chief, fleet's advice on the report and the Admiralty Board's response are also being published. Some information has been redacted to ensure the Department's compliance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 98). Certain other information has also been withheld as its provision would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness and security of the armed forces.
Other papers relating to the BOI report, including the post-attack narrative and analysis, and the captain's report on the incident will be published in two further phases before the end of the year. However, we will be withholding from publication copies of the witness statements that were taken by the board, as we believe that the disclosure of this personal data would be unfair to the individuals concerned and would be contrary to DPA 98.
This phrase is often used in written answers to indicate that a minister has deposited some relevant information in the House of Commons Library. Typical content includes research reports, letters, and tables of data not published elsewhere.
A list of such depositions can be found at http://deposits.parliament.uk/ along with some of the documents. The Library is not open to the public, but copies of documents can be requested if they are not on that website. For more information, see the House of Commons factsheet: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/P15.pdf
Annotations
Mark Bestford
Posted on 4 Nov 2006 1:04 pm (Report this annotation)
I don't know what anyone else might make of the report, but I'm actually quite impressed. Whereas it shows that the attack may have been thwarted at the time, that in itself would have neen persuant to many factors coming into play at once. Quite simply, the Argentinians got lucky, striking HMS Sheffield in probably the one place which would cause a fatal hit. It is also important to note however, that again through luck, much higher casualties were avoided by the failure of the missile to detonate. Yes, there were failings. No, none could have been foreseen without hindsight. It has to be remembered, in battle you will often take losses, especially against what actually turned out to be a highly trained Argentinian air force.
One failing in the report that I see is a recommendation to investigate the reasons behind the failure of the missile to detonate, given that the Exocet missile was a mainstay of the British Navy's arsenal at the time.