Comments on: Fire Safety reports http://heatherbrooke.org/2006/fire-safety-reports/ Heather Brooke is an award-winning writer, journalist and activist Wed, 21 Dec 2011 15:17:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: xxxxx http://heatherbrooke.org/2006/fire-safety-reports/comment-page-1/#comment-1129 xxxxx Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:01:24 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/2006/fire-safety-reports/#comment-1129 We are concerned about public safety at Lewis bonfire night. We are concerned about public safety at Lewis bonfire night.

]]> By: Nick Evans http://heatherbrooke.org/2006/fire-safety-reports/comment-page-1/#comment-1128 Nick Evans Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:34:02 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/2006/fire-safety-reports/#comment-1128 Section 21 made it a criminal offence to reveal information that had been obtained when taking entry under the Fire Precautions Act. As section 21 has been repealed, it is now no longer an offence to reveal that information. There are no savings for information that was obtained before the repeal, so it's fairly clear that the offence no longer applies to any revelation. However, it could fairly be argued that a duty of confidentiality applies to information that was obtained while s.21 applied. If so, this would trigger the exemption under s. 41 of the FoI act. Even if s. 41 does apply, this is better than the previous position because the confidentiality exemption contains a public interest test. Section 21 made it a criminal offence to reveal information that had been obtained when taking entry under the Fire Precautions Act. As section 21 has been repealed, it is now no longer an offence to reveal that information. There are no savings for information that was obtained before the repeal, so it’s fairly clear that the offence no longer applies to any revelation.

However, it could fairly be argued that a duty of confidentiality applies to information that was obtained while s.21 applied. If so, this would trigger the exemption under s. 41 of the FoI act. Even if s. 41 does apply, this is better than the previous position because the confidentiality exemption contains a public interest test.

]]>