{"content":[{"text":"5.","bbox":{"left":0.121933,"top":0.086912,"width":0.015119000000000007,"height":0.015785000000000007}},{"text":"Beginning and completing Tranche 1 in early 2021 would have several important \n advantages: \n a. If the social distancing rules are relaxed further by the new year (or if the Inquiry \n were able to secure a more spacious venue than Pocock St), it will allow the Core \n Participants (CPs) to make their opening statements in person and to respond more \n effectively to the statements of other participants. \n b. Further relaxed social distancing (or a different venue, if achievable) will also \n afford the Inquiry a wider range of options as to how it could, effectively and \n securely, hear from witnesses and provide greater public access to its proceedings, \n avoiding some of the potentially disruptive logistical and security challenges \n addressed below. \n c. It will allow the Inquiry to complete all phases of Tranche 1 in a single sitting or in \n more proximate multiple sittings. \n d. Moving the hearings to early 2021 may allow the Tranche 1 managers’ written \n evidence to be obtained before the evidence of UCOs is heard. If the managers’ \n evidence were available before the 2021 hearings it would assist CTI and the CPs \n in preparing questions for the Tranche 1 UCOs; would reduce the risk of officers \n being reproofed or recalled to give further evidence once the managers have \n provided their evidence; and would avoid time-costly speculation on a range of \n topics more properly answered by managers (for example, what was done with \n intelligence reports). \n e. It will afford CPs a proper opportunity to consider the Inquiry’s Tranche 1 bundle \n before the hearings, if needs be in two or even more batches. The current timetable \n envisages a very short window for CPs to access the bundle (the size of which \n remains unclear); with a very tight turnaround for the exchange of opening \n statements. This pressure – and the risks it brings – could be avoided. \n f. It will afford the CPs greater opportunity to consider CTI’s and other CPs’ written \n opening statements before they are presented orally, which would be invaluable as \n it would prevent duplication of subject matter and allow CPs to respond, as needed, \n to the issues raised. \n g. Finally, as the MPS has previously discussed with CTI, there is great value in some \n form of neutral timeline or historical evidence being circulated in advance of \n hearings. Such contextual evidence is essential for a proper understanding of the \n undercover work that is the subject of this Inquiry. Starting in early 2021 would \n allow the Inquiry more time to produce this type of evidence ahead of the hearings, \n to the benefit of all CPs.","bbox":{"left":0.152171,"top":0.086912,"width":0.727536,"height":0.675444}},{"text":"6.","bbox":{"left":0.121933,"top":0.784201,"width":0.015119000000000007,"height":0.01578500000000005}},{"text":"The observations which follow are directed to the issues arising if hearings do go ahead in \n November 2020. They must, however, be regarded as provisional for two key reasons.","bbox":{"left":0.152171,"top":0.784201,"width":0.7274149999999999,"height":0.034885000000000055}},{"text":"2","bbox":{"left":0.495676,"top":0.942986,"width":0.010078999999999949,"height":0.01578500000000005}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}