Freedom of Information
Posted by Jo Swinson, MP for East Dunbartonshire, at 17:50, Tue 15 May 2007:
This Friday the Private Members’ Bill about Freedom of Information returns to the House. You can read background information about it here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6598759.stm, but basically it aims to exempt the House of Commons from the list of authorities that has to release information under the Freedom of Information Act.
What do you think about this? If you were in Parliament on Friday, what would you want to say?
Look forward to reading your comments, Jo
Comments
Commenting on this message is now disabled.
Posted by Craig Clement, 18:16, Tue 15 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
If the Mp's want ID cards through their thinking that if you have nothing to hide why should you object to having all details stored on a card. Then they can't object to the people finding out information through the FOI Act.
Posted by Neil Wilson, 19:58, Tue 15 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
The need to exempt the House of Commons from the FOI Act ostensibly to protect private correspondence between constituents and their MP is unnecessary - that is already covered. It is a red herring and the exemption is more about MPs avoiding having to be open with other information. Some MPs have found it uncomfortable to have details of their parliamentary expenses made clear and are attempting to ring fence any future exposure to no more than has been already released. In my view the exemption is about self-interest and ought to be opposed.
Posted by Thomas Shepherd, 20:05, Tue 15 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
Regarding this matter I see, in the main, two principles. Firstly, private correspondence between say me and my MP should not be open for view. However, if I also head a body public or private firm, after public monies ie. people's taxes or other benefit and I correspond to this effect then this is surely ripe for public scrutiny. Secondly, in a democratic society, which we are supposed to be, I expect full disclosure for everything minus national security matters. I expect to be able to access my Governments dealings, for, if not, then we return to being ruled and not represented.
Posted by Neil Scott, 21:28, Tue 15 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
Of course MP's should recieve no more protection than say, teachers or social workers. They are public servants - we pay them their salaries of over £60000 a year. They need to be totally answerable to their employees - us. As Thomas said, we are not their subjects.
Posted by Caroline Pugh, 21:49, Tue 15 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
As MP's provide a service on behalf of the public, their information should be released for public scrutiny.
Posted by Neil Scott, 14:21, Mon 21 May 2007: (Is this post abusive?) #
Could someone point me in the direction of where I can find how Jo voted (or, if you pick this up, could you let me know please Jo?)