Aileen Keel

WS

1. A6(b) - Why did he prefer to use commercial concentrates?

   1. Does she recall having any concerns about this at the time?

2. A18(a) - How did the funding mechanisms differ?

3. A71(a) - Why did she agree with this view?

   1. Has her view changed at all since that time?

Additional

1. Throughout her WS she refers to there being “no evidence” of negligence/wrong-doing with regards to action in the 1970s/80s.

   1. In relation to this document (Which she is CC’d on the email)

   2. If she looks at the final sentence on Page 9, would she agree that this statement “Not convinced…” “...acted wrongly…” is different to there being “no evidence”?

   3. Would she in any event agree that the information presented here paints quite a controversial picture?

      1. It would be wrong to conclude so definitely that there is “no evidence”?

   4. Was she involved at all in the drafting of this information?

      1. If so, naturally many questions for the basis of the assertions made follow. IBI may have access to unredacted copy.