Yesterday (10 December), Jack Straw vetoed releasing the minutes of a 1997 Cabinet Ministerial Committee Meeting on Devolution to Scotland and Wales and the English Regions. He stated that releasing the information would be against the public interest, citing the doctrine of collective responsibility, although the disclosure had previously been approved by the Information Commissioner on June 23rd 2009.
According to the Ministry of Justice, this is only the second time since the Freedom of Information Act was introduced in 2005 that a request granted by an Information Tribunal has been vetoed � out of 160,000 requests. The previous occasion on which the veto was imposed was in February 2009 in respect of the disclosure of the minutes of two cabinet meetings leading up to the Iraq war.
What are Jack Straw and the Ministry of Justice so concerned with concealing? What was said in a meeting about devolution that was so dangerous that it can‘t be made public? What deals were done to break up England and preserve the dominance of Scottish politicians? The English public deserves to know.
This meeting, twelve years ago, led to an asymmetric devolution settlement which is to the great disadvantage of England. The Campaign for an English Parliament believes that action must be taken to deliver a fair and democratic constitutional settlement for England. Lift the veto, Jack, and let us in on the decisions you made.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Unison Union - More Interested In Implementing New Labour Supporting People Policy Than Representing Members' Interests...
From Scotland comes this fascinating article about the in-the-Government's-pocket trade union Unison:
"...corrupt union full-timers more interested in implementing New Labour policy than defending the pay and conditions of their members."
This seems particularly relevant to me at the moment as, under the auspices of the odious Supporting People quango, another round of horrendous cutbacks and redundancies is being carried out in the social care sector. Under orders from and "in cahoots" with Supporting People, the giant axe is swinging again.
A dear friend of mine, who has a front-line job in the care sector which brings in a very meagre salary, faces redundancy, or, possibly, a large drop in salary. No fat cat this. In fact, my friend would have difficulty in affording to keep a domestic cat!
Others are similarly affected and, as usual, the vulnerable adults who are the service users have not been consulted.
And Unison simply waves it all through.
Not a word.
Not a murmur.
Think how they would have behaved if such things had happened in the 1980s!
Hypocrites.
Unison is useless. If you are a member, I think you'd be better off spending your monthly membership fee on chocolate teapots.
"...corrupt union full-timers more interested in implementing New Labour policy than defending the pay and conditions of their members."
This seems particularly relevant to me at the moment as, under the auspices of the odious Supporting People quango, another round of horrendous cutbacks and redundancies is being carried out in the social care sector. Under orders from and "in cahoots" with Supporting People, the giant axe is swinging again.
A dear friend of mine, who has a front-line job in the care sector which brings in a very meagre salary, faces redundancy, or, possibly, a large drop in salary. No fat cat this. In fact, my friend would have difficulty in affording to keep a domestic cat!
Others are similarly affected and, as usual, the vulnerable adults who are the service users have not been consulted.
And Unison simply waves it all through.
Not a word.
Not a murmur.
Think how they would have behaved if such things had happened in the 1980s!
Hypocrites.
Unison is useless. If you are a member, I think you'd be better off spending your monthly membership fee on chocolate teapots.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Climategate - Boring - Exactly How To Disengage Interest...
God I'm sick of "Gates"! After Sharongate in EastEnders I thought people might drop it at last, but here we are again - "Climategate". I spoke to my sixteen-year-old nephew about it tonight.
"What IS Climategate?" he asked.
"Have you seen the headlines?" I asked.
"Yeah - sounds boring," he said.
"Well, do you know about Watergate?" I asked.
"No," he said.
Surely it would engage far more interest if headlines were a little more descriptive, and did not depend so much on what the younger generation regard as ancient history? I mean, for God's sake - I'm in my forties and I was only eight at the time of Watergate!
"What IS Climategate?" he asked.
"Have you seen the headlines?" I asked.
"Yeah - sounds boring," he said.
"Well, do you know about Watergate?" I asked.
"No," he said.
Surely it would engage far more interest if headlines were a little more descriptive, and did not depend so much on what the younger generation regard as ancient history? I mean, for God's sake - I'm in my forties and I was only eight at the time of Watergate!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)