Significant Information Tribunal decision
The Information Tribunal's decision, announced today, to uphold the ruling by the Information Commissioner [77Kb pdf] that minutes of cabinet meetings from 2003 should be released is a highly significant development. It could even lead to the first instance of ministers using their right of veto to block an FOI disclosure. [Update: Read the decision here [2Mb pdf] and see Nick Robinson's post; also an article by Jeremy Hayes here.]
The decision refers to meetings that discussed the the attorney-general's legal advice about the Iraq war. But the particular significance from an FOI point of view is in the precedents that this case may create.
Some are asking whether it is a green light for the release of other cabinet minutes. The Tribunal says not necessarily - under the FOI Act, every case has to be assessed on its own merits. But it may pave the way for a potentially more important precedent.
The government has argued that releasing such minutes would impede proper recording of free and frank discussion within cabinet. It is likely to resist the ruling, either by appealing to the High Court or by using the ministerial right to veto a Tribunal decision for the first time.
To use the veto will cause a big fuss - but the government could see this as a strong case for doing so, then making it easier to do so again on future occasions once a precedent has been established. That is why some FOI campaigners have been feeling rather uneasy about this case, fearing that this Tribunal decision in favour of greater openness could, ironically, turn out to be a setback for their cause.
A 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~27~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
To quote the government over ID Cards -- if you have nothing to hide, what is the problem.
Shame this is likely to be blocked as it would have been so special for the public to finally see Blair, Brown & Labour for what they really are.
A BIG con !
Complain about this comment
The minutes should be release so the public can understand what led us to war in Iraq. We already know that the pretence of the war (WMDs and 45minute claim) was totally wrong. The government actions on Iraq were a train-wreck of decision making, and like a real train-wreck, there should be a public investigation to determine what went wrong and what steps can be taken to ensure it does not happen again.
Of course, I do not believe the real minutes will ever be release because they will be too incriminating for those in power.
The WMD claims were from a single source, "Curveball" who was paid for the information by the CIA. Our own Intelligence Service knew this information was single source and not reliable. They would have pass that information on to the government. Why then did they keep repeating the WMDs publicly as fact?
Furthermore, Hans Blix and the IAEA were on the ground in Iraq. If any intelligence was credible, then it should have directed then straight to WMDs.
We need the Minutes of meetings released so we can find out why we, the public, were fed such a flawed case for war by OUR government.
We already know they lied. If the truth does not come out then our government will have zero credibility at home or abroad. (Not that they have much anyway post-credit-crunch!)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As all politicians and civil servants draw their salaries from taxpayers, any one of us (should) have the right to see, read and hear and demand explanations for everything done in our name when any one of us wishes such.
NB democracy is more than one person one vote!
Complain about this comment
The only reason *anything* done by any government should be hidden is if disclosure would threaten the lives of personnel in either the armed services or the identity of our spies.
In this day and age governmental meetings that are not filmed should not be deemed to have any legal or consitutional standing, and those recordings should be available immediately to the public except in the cases above.
The various 30/50/100 year rules are hold overs from before this country supposedly became a democracy and are simply and routinely used to cover up the sort of corruption that is revealed every year when the records from 30 years before are opened up.
We hear calls for reform of the Lords year after year, but the truth is that the Commons is an utter sesspit which is centuries overdue root and branch reform.
If the government has done nothing wrong then it has no reason to hide from the people who elected it, has it?
Complain about this comment
#5 WinkelPicker
One person one vote, one company - several more votes. Sorry but the only open government you'll get from this lot (or any other for that matter) is the open trapdoor all the truth is shovelled through.
As an IT expert I have had to suffer the embarrasment and indignity of watching billions being spent on projects that were designed by the companies that are incapable of implementing them - many of them 'off the shelf' software already available for free.
Open Government is easy to implement in theory, in practice our politicians get in the way - and then we vote for them again!!
Complain about this comment
I acknowledge that freedom of information is vital - and that politicians and governments should be held accountable.
Mistakes have clearly been made by all previous governments - as they would openly admit.
But there is no future in dwelling on the mistakes of the past, particularly if this diverts resources, money and intellect from the crises of the present. Let the past be our teacher - let us learn from it - but let it lie. And let government concern itself with our country's needs of the present and the immediate future. Those needs are greater than the need to exact political revenge.
Complain about this comment
We complained recently when Robert Mugabe refused to acknowledge and implement the demands of the High Court in Harare.
Now Gordon Brown does the same when the High Court upholds a decision that details of the March 13 and 17 sessions should be disclosed.
Seems things are worse in this country than we thought.
Complain about this comment
But there is no future in dwelling on the mistakes of the past, particularly if this diverts resources, money and intellect from the crises of the present. Let the past be our teacher - let us learn from it - but let it lie.
I'm left wondering what deterrent there is therefore with this system?
I agree that mistakes must be learnt, but if you allow history to dictate that nothing was done to those who perpetrated the mistakes are you not therefore set to repeat those mistakes?
This FoI issue only really becomes important when it could reflect badly on the actual integrity of the people concerned.
I don't understand why the government would try to prevent access to this information if it would clear up all the innuendo. It can't be easy pushing through policy when you have this elephant in the room.
Complain about this comment
There's something we're all smart enough to know:
Should these Cabinet minutes be published in less than a severely edited form, it is very unlikely that any controversial matter would ever again be discussed by any government in such a recorded forum ever again. Which would be a serious disruption to our interests. Unless, of course, Parliament amends the FoI Act immediately and to exclude any future publication within the usual long time limits. I like the FoI Act and don't want it repealed.
The Information Commissioner knows all that would happen, and is just grandstanding for effect. Or else he really wants to ensure that the Data Protection Act - that restricts publication of government information to prevail.
There will be a full Iraq enquiry when the situation ends and is calmed down. That'll be when the story will unfold.
Complain about this comment
I think this is a dangerous precedent which will ensure that all future cabinet discussions go either unrecorded or do not take place, for fear of being used as a cudgel in years to come. Either way, that does nobody any good.
I also suspect that the Information Commissioner is being somewhat disingenuous about his reasons for wanting this released. "In the public interest" and "of interest to the public" are not the same thing.
As for the charge that the government is obsessed with secrecy, they introduced the FOI Act. Prior to that, cabinet meetings were secret as a matter of course. Nobody is being any more secretive than they were previously.
All that will happen is that the government will veto this and we'll be exactly where we started.
Complain about this comment
Dear Martin and Jane
THE Government should have no secrets, everything should be in the public domain, EVERYTHING , as the Government does what it does in the name of the British People.
The only reason issues and events are kept out of the Public Domain is because of the People involved ESPECIALLY SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL AND THE LIKE.
They do not want us to know how under handed and manipulative they were -----especially at foreign policy
I know issues they do not want to get out, and frankly it shows them up to be what they really are and were like, and you think the General Public are bad, if the Archives were OPEN FORUM you would see ALL our politicians from a different view point,---- that will confirm what we already think of them.
Complain about this comment
"National Security" should never be allowed to stand in for "embarassment" as an excuse for hiding truth. Accountability in a democracy is as critical as air is to breathing, and if you allow ministers to exempt themselves from it then we all suffer.
Complain about this comment
"The government has argued that releasing such minutes would impede proper recording of free and frank discussion within cabinet".
This smacks of 'OK if you try to make us play by the rules - we'll just take our ball and go home'.
Start by making MP's sign a legally binding 'code of conduct' with statutory penalties for failing to uphold the standards of the house. We need them to be directly accountable and since they have failed to do this voluntarily I suggest a contract of employment - because that is what they are, employees paid out of the public purse.
I would love to see them behave like grown-up adults, get rid of the archaic protocols and use clear English - no more the 'Right Honourable member' and begin the process of reforming parlimentary procedures so that we DO have 'open government'.
The House of Commons is increasingly being seen to be - what it is, 'Tom Brown's School Days' meets the cast of 'Are You Being Served?' on the set of 'Blackadder III' - it would be hillarious if it wasn't so tragic.
The risk is that MP's will feel they cannot speak freely because they may have to think before they speak and could even be held to account for their views - 'wah wah wah' big deal. The shock of FOI Act disclosures has worn off and we already have DNWTD (Do Not Write This Down) OTR (Off The Record) VM (Virtual Meetings) and 'plausabile deniability'.
A majority of the time the public can't get a direct answer out their elected representatives - esp. when it comes to questions relating to their salary, expenses and perks.
Hold their feet to the fire because when they start vetoing FOI requests, it will simply serve to reinforce every negative impression we have of them. Many would argue that since joining the EU our MP's have themselves become increasingly irrelevant.
Ironically it is the unelected House of Lords who have done the most to uphold, protect and extend the powers of the FOI, no wonder the government are desperate to 'reform' them!! We can't risk an outbreak of democratic accountability now, can we?
Complain about this comment
I think that Parliament’s veto of the Information Commissioner so-called rulings is vital and I also think that it should be used in this situation not only because future cabinet decisions could be impaired but because such rulings are wrong in principle.
It is offensive for us to vote for our MPs only to find that a quango can rule over them.
Complain about this comment
Meanwhile....the Data Bill is stealthily creeping along. We really mustn't let this happen if we wish to retain a vestige of freedom.
Needs an expose BBC.
Complain about this comment
Firstly, the Information Commissioner is well aware of the differnce between 'the public interest' and 'interesting to the public'. Indeed anybody how works with FOIA or EIR on a regular basis should be aware of this rather fundamental aspect of the legislation.
Also, just to correct the article slightly, the Information Tribunal is the final arbiter regarding this matter and there is no legislative recourse to the High Court for MP's, although I'm sure they'd take it if there was.
Their only option now is to exercise their veto or concede. Whilst I'm sure they want to do the former, I hope they do the latter.
Given that both the Information Commissioner and the Tribunal have considered the issue of hindering future debate within Government (which was HM govs main objection) and yet they have still come to the conclusion that the information should be released should tell you something about that information's importance.
Complain about this comment
#7 - You claim that all previous governments have made mistakes - "as they'll admit." However this government does not admit to any mistakes, in the main it's America's fault.
You also said "let the past be our teacher." Again I'm afraid you have misunderstood current affairs, Mr Blair has said that history will exonerate his actions - therefore, quite obviously history is not something you learn from, it's something that will happen in the future.
Complain about this comment
Dame Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5 - in an interview - with a Spanish newspaper. A Spanish newspaper.
And talking heads from Liberty, the major political parties and the words "police state" bandied about?
Dear me. They let that gentleman go who was accused of selling nuclear secrets to various sources.
No charges to be bought in this or that case, justice meted out in many others and I fully expect a recently goaled Lord will be freed soon enough.
And yet and yet - there is something missing Great Britain. Someone unaccounted for in this not a police state.
As I wipe away tears of laughter, I nod sagely and think - of course they are ALL right.
Can I now be interviewed by a Spanish paper - EL PAÍS, ABC, EL MUNDO, LA VANGUARDIA or EL PERIÓDICO and officially tell the world?
Complain about this comment
quite amusing this determination to see the balen report, as if the whole of zionist wishes would be fulfilled.
it is nonsense of course, all authoritative independent surveys and detailed research has found the bbc to be against the palestinians.
why should an (ex) bbc exec (balen) provide balance any more than the bbc trust ?
are there any substantive independent research along the lines of the academic one by loghborough, cardiff, edinburgh et al that provides a suggested anti israel bias or is it just the balen report?
Complain about this comment
Now Straw has forbidden the release of the cabinet minutes
Just what is hidden in those documents that they don't want us to see?
Complain about this comment
#21. Well, if the BBC was to publish the Balen Report, perhaps we would at least have a clue. When the current lot are cleared out I suspect it will be published.
Complain about this comment
Sorry, I meant #20 not #21
Well, if the BBC was to publish the Balen Report, perhaps we would at least have a clue. When the current lot are cleared out I suspect it will be published.
Complain about this comment
I follow FoI issues and have found an excellent new blog which gives intelligent and witty updates on the latest FoI information. www.foinews.co.uk
Complain about this comment
It seems as if the politicians forget on a daily basis who it is they actually work for and represent. I'm not sure if I agree that cabinet minutes should be held under wraps in order to not impede "free and frank discussion". This seems to suggest they have something to hide, and only have the nerve to speak their mind behind closed doors and in closed sessions.
JTayler
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS