When the embargoed copies of the Nullius report went out, there was a bit of a kerfuffle on Twitter, with Bob Ward claiming I was trying to smear him by mentioning his departure from the Royal Society and the rumours that he had been sacked. I thought this was a bit unfair, as I had gone on to point out that Rees had praised Ward's work after he had left, and observed that this suggested official approval of his campaign against Exxon.
I'm grateful to Alex Cull for this excerpt of an interview with Lord May which confirms this impression.
That was an example of aggressive engagement to be useful to government that not everybody had a clear conscience about, but I think was useful, and not everybody was happy with the sometimes quite in-your-face comments that the Royal Society or its president made, particularly helped by the head of the press office Bob Ward, whom I found immensely valuable. He had the knack of being able to capture my voice so he could write things that I got the credit for and didn't have to do the work, and I think the kinds of things we did were entirely appropriate.
This does seem to confirm what I said in the report and it therefore appears unlikely that Ward was sacked.
What can we say about the Royal Society - a body that is mainly tax-funded - engaging in a campaign against a private company. Is this a proper use of taxpayer's money?