---

Forensic Science

: I thank the hon. Gentleman, because I was about to make that very point. I agree: the Home Office is setting itself up as judge and jury, and executioner, all at the same time, and that is unfortunate. I hope that there will be—as mentioned in the Government response—genuine scrutiny by the National Audit Office. It is essential that there is independent scrutiny of this process, and it must be transparent. My heart sinks slightly when I come across the usual weasel words in publications such as the Government response to the Select Committee's report. It states:"““There is no intention to conceal any performance-related information, but it would not be reasonable to disclose any commercially sensitive information that could undermine the ability of FSS GovCo to operate competitively.””" That kind of phrase covers all manner of sins. It provides the excuse of not saying anything at all. That cannot be acceptable either. I am not in commerce myself, but other hon. Members present are, and I am sure they would agree that that is not a sound principle on which to operate. It is just a bit of a cover-up. I am not in any way blaming my hon. Friend the Minister, but it is a smokescreen behind which civil servants are happy to hide. There must be transparency in the judgment process. Even if the timetable were extended until the summer of next year, it would still be an unrealistically short period in which to judge the performance of a complex operation. It needs at least two years of annual operating and financial results.