Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Friday, 20 April 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill.


Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill

Well, no. If I, or any other Member of Parliament, had behaved in that way, that would be reprehensible and should be exposed. I would be very happy for my correspondence with my county council or a Minister on any issue to be available for public scrutiny, provided that it does not cut across the data protection legislation protecting constituents. If I am writing on general issues of relevance to my constituents, of course my views should be on the record. My constituents want to know what my views are, as do constituents of all MPs, and they have the right to know them—they have the right to receive a full view. If MPs are to be given the capacity to say one thing in public and then separately to write something very different to a public authority, that will be a dangerous road to go down and it will potentially bring parliamentary democracy and individual MPs into disrepute, as will exempting the House of Commons from the Freedom of Information Act 2000.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c616-7 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Data protection Accountability Allowances Correspondence Freedom of information House of Lords House of Commons Exemptions Members Public opinion Travel Standards Parliamentary questions Members' constituency work
Legislation
Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk