Parliament: All-party group attack Straw's Information Bill
Andrew Grice has been Political Editor of The Independent since 1998. He was previously Political Editor of The Sunday Times, where he worked for 10 years, and he has been a Westminster-based journalist since 1982. His column, Inside Politics, appears in The Independent each Saturday.
Friday 12 November 1999
The Labour-dominated Select Committee on Administration urged the Home Secretary, Jack Straw, to think again about key elements of his proposals before putting a Bill before Parliament in the new session starting next week.
Although the MPs welcomed the Government's recent concessions to its critics on the issue, they insisted it had not gone far enough. If ministers refuse to give further ground, the changes demanded by the committee are likely to form the basis of amendments to the Bill during its passage through Parliament.
With many Labour MPs committed to a tough freedom of information law, the Government would risk a defeat if it fails to back down.
Yesterday's report said: "We are disappointed that the Government has not amended the basic structure and scheme of the draft Bill." The MPs regretted that, under Mr Straw's plans, there would be "no clear presumption in favour of disclosure" of information. They were worried that the commissioner to be appointed to oversee the new law would not be able to order the release of information, even if he felt this would be in the public interest. Such decisions would continue to be taken by ministers.
The committee warned that the Government's plans would allow "blanket restrictions" on certain types of information, such as the formulation of government policy and the operation of ministers' private offices.
Ministers want material to be kept secret when disclosure would result in "prejudice". But the MPs said this would be "too weak" to ensure much disclosure, and want the test to be changed to "substantial" or "significant" prejudice.
They said the exemptions in the draft Bill remained "too broad", particularly those covering government decision-making and policy formulation and information about commercial interests. "As a result, the amount of information that will become available will be relatively small," they warned.
Although some "particularly objectionable" restrictions had been dropped from theoriginal proposals, the MPs said this still left "fundamental issues on which the Government's position differs sharply from that of the committee".
- 1 'Women should not laugh in public,' says Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister in morality speech
- 2 The secret report that helps Israel hide facts
- 3 Is Ebola coming to Britain? UK health officials issue warning to doctors as outbreak fears grow
- 4 Richard Dawkins says 'date rape is bad, stranger rape is worse' on Twitter
- 5 Danish TV reporter is all business up top, all party down below
The secret report that helps Israel hide facts
A day in the life of Vladimir Putin: The dictator in his labyrinth
Woman and two children killed by mob in riots over 'blasphemous' Facebook post in Pakistan
Putin is 'thuggish, dishonest and reckless', says British ambassador to US
Boozy, ignorant, intolerant, but very polite – Britain as others see us
A new Russian revolution: The cracks are starting to appear in Putin’s Kremlin power bloc
- < Previous
- Next >
Competitive: The Green Recruitment Company: The Organisation: The Green Recrui...
£350 - £400 per annum + competitive: Orgtel: Project Manager (specializing in ...
£40000 - £50000 per annum + competitive: Progressive Recruitment: Embedded Sof...
£50000 - £65000 per annum + Benefits: Progressive Recruitment: Working for a m...