Comments on: Bigger moats to clean http://heatherbrooke.org/2009/bigger-moats-to-clean/ Heather Brooke is an award-winning writer, journalist and activist Sun, 29 Apr 2012 09:44:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Flemingcrag http://heatherbrooke.org/2009/bigger-moats-to-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-2205 Flemingcrag Sun, 14 Jun 2009 04:48:10 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/?p=861#comment-2205 Politicians of all shades will never change, the attempt to exclude us mere mortals from knowing how they milked and abused the expenses allowance to the Nth degree is just the tip of an iceberg they wish to keep secret to themselves. The culprits are not confined to Gordon's Policy Unit, if it was Dave's Policy Unit the results would be just as prohibitive. It does not stop there the collusion of some (many) of the Media is depressing. I mean the whole debate on the 30 year rule centres on a report from Paul Dacre, the biggest apologist for Gordon Brown and this Government it has been my misfortune to read over the last few years. As to any question of how secrecy is applied to the Royal family, that is not of their making it is up to the Politicians to determine how open to the public their affairs should be. I suspect they are the smokescreen behind which the Government intends to hide its own secret interests. It's known in the "Trade" as a diversionary tactic. Politicians of all shades will never change, the attempt to exclude us mere mortals from knowing how they milked and abused the expenses allowance to the Nth degree is just the tip of an iceberg they wish to keep secret to themselves.
The culprits are not confined to Gordon’s Policy Unit, if it was Dave’s Policy Unit the results would be just as prohibitive. It does not stop there the collusion of some (many) of the Media is depressing. I mean the whole debate on the 30 year rule centres on a report from Paul Dacre, the biggest apologist for Gordon Brown and this Government it has been my misfortune to read over the last few years.
As to any question of how secrecy is applied to the Royal family, that is not of their making it is up to the Politicians to determine how open to the public their affairs should be. I suspect they are the smokescreen behind which the Government intends to hide its own secret interests. It’s known in the “Trade” as a diversionary tactic.

]]> By: Nick http://heatherbrooke.org/2009/bigger-moats-to-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-2204 Nick Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:09:10 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/?p=861#comment-2204 I think people are jumping to conclusions here. Brown's statement is very brief: "As the [Dacre] report recommended, we have considered the need to strengthen protection for particularly sensitive material and there will be protection of Royal Family and Cabinet papers as part of strictly limited exemptions. But we will reduce the time for release of all other official documents below the current 30 years, to 20 years." It's not clear to me whether that means Cabinet and Royal papers will be exempt from FoI, or whether they'll be exempt from the reduction in the 30 yr rule. The Minister didn't seem to know at a conference yesterday, so it's certainly worth lobbying on the point. And, of course, any such restriction would not apply to the Environmental Information Regs. So we could still get access to Prince Charles's attempts to skew the planning system. I think people are jumping to conclusions here. Brown’s statement is very brief: “As the [Dacre] report recommended, we have considered the need to strengthen protection for particularly sensitive material and there will be protection of Royal Family and Cabinet papers as part of strictly limited exemptions. But we will reduce the time for release of all other official documents below the current 30 years, to 20 years.”

It’s not clear to me whether that means Cabinet and Royal papers will be exempt from FoI, or whether they’ll be exempt from the reduction in the 30 yr rule.

The Minister didn’t seem to know at a conference yesterday, so it’s certainly worth lobbying on the point.

And, of course, any such restriction would not apply to the Environmental Information Regs. So we could still get access to Prince Charles’s attempts to skew the planning system.

]]> By: Zorro http://heatherbrooke.org/2009/bigger-moats-to-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-2203 Zorro Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:18:45 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/?p=861#comment-2203 The royals generally may not be 'above the law' but I thought the queen actually was? They are her courts aren't they? :) Keep up the great work Heather! The royals generally may not be ‘above the law’ but I thought the queen actually was? They are her courts aren’t they? :)

Keep up the great work Heather!

]]> By: Dan Brusca http://heatherbrooke.org/2009/bigger-moats-to-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-2202 Dan Brusca Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:46:08 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/?p=861#comment-2202 Actually, the Queen *is* above the law ;) Part of the problem with applying FOI to the royal family is that there is often a blurring of the line between them as private and public individuals, so you have to balance the public right to information about them with their own right to a private life. Actually, the Queen *is* above the law ;)

Part of the problem with applying FOI to the royal family is that there is often a blurring of the line between them as private and public individuals, so you have to balance the public right to information about them with their own right to a private life.

]]>