A commission appointed by President Barack Obama to investigate the Gulf of Mexico oil spill strongly criticizes the White House in a number of areas. The Obama administration are accused of blocking government scientists efforts to inform the public of the worst-case scenario. Officials are said to have been too optimistic about handling the disaster.

The report by the National Oil Spill Commission says the White House was directly involved in controlling information about the spill. During the first 10 days of the oil spill, that began following an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on 20 April, the government’s response “seemed to lag” and Coast Guard officials were “overly optimistic” in thinking BP could handle the incident

Carol Browner, the president’s adviser on energy policy, wrongly said on television that three-quarters of the oil had “gone” and the White House did not allow a request by officials to make public the worst case scenario for the scale of the oil leak.

Government scientists were also accused of under estimating the amount of oil pouring from the leak and then over estimating the quantity which had been removed from the area, mainly by evaporation.

The commission said that the White House budget office had denied a request from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to make public its worst case scenario of how much oil could escape from the well.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and retired Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen told the public the worst case scenario could be more than 4.2 million gallons per day. However BP‘s drilling permit for the well said 6.8 million gallons of oil could escape from the well in the worst case scenario.

NOAA and the Coast Guard later received the revised worst case scenario figures just after the oil spill began which then put the estimate from 2.7 million gallons up to 4.6 million gallons. The commission says that these numbers which were used as the basis for the administration’s response, were never made public.

The report also criticizes the federal government for using too much boom to stop your spreading oil, especially in Louisiana, to “keep the parishes happy”.

The oil spill was the result of an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig which killed 11 workers and rupturing the well. The rig sank and the escaping oil polluted hundreds of miles of shoreline and disrupted local fishing and tourism and killed a lot of wildlife before the well was capped and the oil contained on 15 July. The well was eventually sealed on the 18th September.

Under pressure BP chief executive Tony Hayward is to leave BP in October. He will get an immediate annual pension of around $930000 when he leaves. That is $25.479 per day.

Mr. Hayward has been under pressure over the Gulf of Mexico oil leak and it is expected that his pension entitlement will be hugely controversial given the pollution and affect on people whose lives have been affected by the oil spill.

It is understood that BP pension scheme rules allow the pension to be taken at any point after the age of 50. Mr. Haywood’s pension is valued at about £11 million and he also had six years under a long term performance scheme which might eventually be worth seven several millions more. Mr.

Mr. Hayward was leaving by a mutual agreement and will be replaced by American colleague Bob Dudley who is presently in charge of the Gulf of Mexico cleanup operation for the company.

BP is set to reveal its latest results on Tuesday. The accounts will cover the  compensation and clean up costs of up to $30 billions  and may result in the worst quarterly loss for a UK company. It has lost 40% of its market capitalization since the May accident and spill.

Mr. Hayward has been heavily criticized by residents of the Gulf Coast and also by US politicians for his handling of the cleanup operation. He has also made a series of gaffes including saying that he just “wanted his life back”. He was also taken to task for attending a sailing event in the UK in June whilst the pollution was increasing day by day. Mr. Haywood was rebuked by members of the house energy and commerce committee at stonewalling questions at a congressional hearing.