This distinction matters because Project Bromo simultaneously touches industrial policy, public shareholdings, space programmes, European relations, employment and corporate governance. Political accountability concerns the definition of the national interest and the conditions attached to the transaction; administrative accountability concerns the quality and timing of the analysis; parliamentary accountability concerns scrutiny; managerial accountability concerns the negotiation and implementation of site missions, workshare, intellectual property and workforce plans.
The dossier applies a documentary test. For each actor it asks what power was available, what information was requested, what instrument was produced, what condition was sought, what outcome followed and what remedy would apply if indicators deteriorated. An adverse industrial outcome does not by itself prove personal responsibility; conversely, the existence of a formal remit does not prove that it was exercised. The evidence lies in mandates, minutes, baselines, metrics and decision logs.
This approach avoids two opposite errors: attributing collective industrial choices to one individual, or dispersing responsibility until no decision can be traced. Bromo instead requires a clear map of who must do what, by when, and through which verifiable output.
Accountability means linking each power to a verifiable act, not turning the dossier into a list of accusations.
