Parliamentary question from Tuesday - anyone else catch the 'non-denial denial' about UAPs?

MPs were asking questions about UAP sightings over military installations on Tuesday afternoon. There's a Hansard record of it. What's interesting is the Defence Secretary's response - he basically said "The Ministry of Defence takes reports seriously" and "We investigate credible sightings" but completely avoided answering whether the government has classified footage or data.

Classic political technique - answer without answering. If they had nothing to hide, they'd just say "no, we don't have any evidence." Instead he used what looks like careful prepared language.

The fact that someone in Parliament felt confident enough to ask about this publicly is interesting in itself. Usually these questions get batted away. This time there seemed to be a bit more... weight to it? Anyone else following UK parliamentary stuff on this topic?

The exact quote was "His Majesty's Government is committed to transparency in matters of national security where possible." That qualifier - "where possible" - is doing a lot of work. It's basically saying "we'll tell you what we can get away with telling you." Standard MoD speak.

I've been watching parliamentary questions for years and this was definitely different in tone. Usually it's framed as a curiosity or gets treated with barely concealed dismissal. This time the questioner seemed to have done their homework and the government's response was more... careful. Like they were worried about setting a precedent with their answer.

Does anyone actually believe the government would voluntarily disclose classified UAP data to Parliament? Even if they had the most explosive evidence imaginable, releasing it would trigger international incidents and probably economic chaos. They're never going to willingly open that door.

I watched the live debate. What wasn't in the Hansard record is the body language - the Defence Secretary looked genuinely uncomfortable. His press officer was passing him notes. That's not normal for routine parliamentary questions. Something's rattled them.