Redacting Worse than the Truth

There are certain things that I can accept should have been redacted with the publications of MPs expenses:

• The personal details of staff members, their addresses, bank details etc
• I'd also by the same score accept account details of the MPs themselves for their banks and services.
• Signatures also as this could lead to fraud. Although I did notice Michael Connarty's familiar looping Y was always peaking out from under this redactions.

However, there appears to be a lot that has been left out.

• The names and locations of where things were purchased.
• The detailing of what is on the receipt. I know that one of the new measures is that receipts are required for every amount claimed (welcome to the world the rest of us inhabit) but surely this could be shown now.

Some of the mysterious thing from my perusal of just a few was the number of overdue bills just from the West Lothian members. TV licenses had expired, Council Tax was not paid on time, phone bills, electric etc, other services related to accommodation were not paid on time. In this modern age most of these can be set up as direct debit payments and you never worry about the time that is being paid or that it hasn't been being paid. I accept that being a elected representative is time consuming matter but some simple steps could make things easier.

Also in the letter from Connarty to Devine detailing the £4000 sale of furniture at the top of the letter after Dear there is a redact over the name. It looks about the length to be Jim but obviously it must not be as this is the only part of the body of the text that is redacted. Maybe Michael has a pet name for Jim....slim, or sexy, or love...eugh.....sorry back to reality and that is the reason that it was black inked.

Whoever took it upon themselves to redact so much of these thousands of pages of claims has does a disservice to the phrase transparent Government. Indeed it reminds me of Sir Humphrey Littleton in the 'Open Government' episode of Yes Minister it is just the sort of compromise that he would have got Jim Hacker to agree to, nay suggest, in the closing scene should be the Department of Administrative Affairs approach to releasing MP's expenses.

Nats Want Freedom: Just Not Their Information

The double standards for the SNP have come to light again this time over the Freedom of Information.

Last month they were up in arms with Jack Straw about the UK Government's failure to release Cabinet papers in the run up to the Iraq war. However, when the Scotsman asked them to release the minutes of the Cabinet meeting on 10 February when the Cabinet decided to drop plans to ditch replacing Council Tax with LIT, nothing.

Taking Angus Robertson's words from last month.

"The public feels it was lied to about the reasons for going to war in Iraq, and those responsible must not be allowed to hide from an inquiry.

"This Cabinet cover up is typical of the Labour government’s attitude to freedom of information.

"....Those responsible have never answered the most fundamental questions about why we were led into this war.

"The claim that the war was about weapons of mass destruction was a lie, a mere cover story unsupported by the facts, which has cost the lives of thousands of civilians and hundreds of our brave soldiers"

With a slight adjustment we can ask.

"The public feels it was lied to about the reasons for breaking this policy
pledged in 2007, and those responsible must not be allowed to hide from an
inquiry.

"This Cabinet cover up is typical of the SNP government’s attitude to freedom of information and the Scottish electorate.

"Those responsible have never answered the most fundamental questions about
why we were led away from this policy that they still protected staunchly weeks
before.

"The claim that the recession makes it impossible to bring about a fairer tax for the less well off is a lie, a mere cover story unsupported by the facts, which has cost thousands of pounds needlessly to those less able to pay the unfair council tax."

Update: I see that Jeff has taken the contrary view which I find discouraging for a supporter of a party that only wants Open Government (to quote the Jim Hacker plan on this issue) on things that suit itself. It is not a case of either or. If you want to utilise FoI legislation for gaining info you have to also be prepared to tender information when requested.

I suspect that the Scotsman already know what happened in those cabinet meetings and are merely wanting to get the official minute before publication. A dangerous game for the Nats to play.

But Gord Will Back Down

Success. Well done all.

The decision to revoke an earlier decision to publish MPs expenses which the Government then backtracked on is now back on track. Gordon Brown surprised many when backed down during PMQs saying he would no longer be seeking to give MPs such an exemption under Freedom of Information.

The activities Unlock Democracy, enoughsenough.com and my society launched mobilising social networks within hours were key in getting people involved and applying pressure. Things like the Twitter hashtag #MPexpenses, Facebook Groups and other means certainly got the word out quickly and many people seemed to be contacting their MPs to sign Jo Swinson's Early Day Motion, or to vote or speak against this proposal. Apparently many MPs were inundated with letters as the people spoke.

Maybe we truly are heading to an Internet age where if we do not carry out referendae on every piece of legislation the people can at least express their views in issues which detract from the fundamentals of freedom and trust. The public can and must keep holding their parliament to account, after all MPs are only at Westminster by the grace of the electorate.

(On a personal note I just wasted my lunch period starting to write a piece up about this before checking my Tweets, for one I'm glad to spike some copy.)