Sadly, I am not close enough to name names. It is impossible to know who says what inside a meeting where you are not there. And what I do know based on second hand information would put my sources at risk because if the same person is in the same meetings it won't take long for whoever is doing it to figure out where the leaks are. You understand that clearly right? You know that is not smoke, mirrors or deflection, but just logical protection for people I care about, trust and believe, right?
Also, there are two factors, malfeasance and malpractice. One is intentional, deceptive and motivationally driven. The other is unintentional, stupid and based on poor judgement. It is easier to believe in the former, but most events are usually the results of the later. But, I can't ascribe which to which with any certainty, again without taking the risks above.
As for our PM, sorry, I checked and it would violate the above if we spoke further on that subject. And yes, I know most people will be skeptical of my claims. I wish they showed this same level of skepticism for those who are telling them what they want to hear also. Meanwhile, when I know something, I will share it, when I see a problem, you will get notice. Other than that, I guess I'm just going to keep my radio on and say at periscope depth.