raised a red flag quick enough on complaints of this nature? and second is protocol, there will be learning from this case. the one thing is the case was kept open so that does not mean we had finished. we have a process where we keep going back, we leave a bit of time and then we go back so the case was kept open. it and then we go back so the case was ke -t 0 en. ., , and then we go back so the case was ke toen. ., and then we go back so the case was ke toen. . ., ., kept open. it was left a lot of time when ou kept open. it was left a lot of time when you consider kept open. it was left a lot of time when you consider that kept open. it was left a lot of time when you consider that was - kept open. it was left a lot of time when you consider that was the i kept open. it was left a lot of time i when you consider that was the 18th or 19th of may until last thursday. you can see from the timeline, they were contacted, there was no response, we can debate how many times that should
speedily. july, i think we acted very speedily- july, i think we acted very seedil . ,, july, i think we acted very seedil . ., speedily. so when you look at the timetable, speedily. so when you look at the timetable. you speedily. so when you look at the timetable, you are speedily. so when you look at the timetable, you are quite - speedily. so when you look at the timetable, you are quite satisfied| timetable, you are quite satisfied with it? i timetable, you are quite satisfied with it? ~ timetable, you are quite satisfied with it? ~ ., , ., with it? i think that s the wrong characterisation. with it? i think that s the wrong characterisation. i with it? i think that s the wrong characterisation. i understand i with it? i think that s the wrong l characterisation. i understand the timetable and follow the process. what i ve said is you always have lessons that you learn from these situations and we are doing two things, firstly, i think there is a valid question that
spoken to in july the 6th. let s talk about spoken to in july the 6th. let s talk about that spoken to in july the 6th. let s talk about that because - spoken to in july the 6th. let s talk about that because i - spoken to injuly the 6th. iezt s talk about that because i think that s a really important point which is if you ve got an allegation coming into a corporate investigations team, i think you need to balance the concerns of duty of care, privacy, all those things i talked about, i don t think you take that complaint direct to a presenter. if you just worked out through, if anything that comes through, if anything that comes through or any car that hasn t been verified just gets brought in front of someone, i would say it s important at that point to validate that, to have notjust the services team about the specialist talk to that individual, understand their concerns and go through that process. concerns and go through that rocess. ., y concerns and go through that roces
haven t spoken to them? i think it s critical they are spoken to by a i critical they are spoken to by a very senior manager, that is appropriate, and i think myself as director general, i m playing the right role in overseeing the process across it. that, i think is the right thing. across it. that, i think is the right thing- across it. that, i think is the riarhtthin. . ., ., right thing. we are in a situation where the right thing. we are in a situation where the sun right thing. we are in a situation where the sun has right thing. we are in a situation where the sun has on right thing. we are in a situation where the sun has on its - right thing. we are in a situation where the sun has on its front i right thing. we are in a situation i where the sun has on its front page the bbc are liars and a story about an unnamed presenter, what do you think about the way they have reported it, have a published prematurely? reported it, have a published rematurel ? , ., , ., , .,