Proceeding contribution from Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 February 2009. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
I am not a supporter of the Freedom of Information Act as currently constituted, although I do not think we should be surprised if there is a right of veto and if it is used. However, given that the then Prime Minister disclosed the thinking in the Cabinet when the decision was made, given that the legal advice was made public, and given that four inquiries were serviced with information, what is the logic behind not taking the final step of revealing the discussions in the Cabinet, if not to hide the Government's embarrassment on this issue? Does the Secretary of State not accept that if the reasons he has given to the House today are to be consistent, the logical position would be simply to have no Cabinet papers revealed?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 488 c166-7
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Armed conflict Attorney General Cabinet Freedom of information Iraq Legal opinion International law Ministerial powers Meetings Cabinet papers Iraq conflict Information Commissioner's Office Information Tribunal
- Legislation
- Freedom of Information Act 2000
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 09:48:28 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530968
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530968
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530968