Straw vetoes Iraq minutes release

[jesusbuiltmycar]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7907991.stm

bbc said:

Justice Secretary Jack Straw has vetoed the publication of minutes of key Cabinet meetings held in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003.

He said he would use a clause in the Freedom of Information Act to block the release of details of meetings in which the war's legality was discussed.

Releasing the papers would do "serious damage" to Cabinet government, he said, and outweighed public interest needs.

The Information Tribunal ruled last month that they should be published.

'Necessary'

They had rejected a government appeal against the Information Commissioner's ruling that the papers be published because decisions taken in the run-up to 2003 invasion of Iraq were "momentous" and controversial.

There is a balance to be struck between openness and maintaining aspects of our structure of democratic government

Jack Straw

The government could have appealed against the Information Tribunal's decision in the High Court, but has decided instead to use the ministerial veto for the first time since the Freedom of Information laws came into force

so much for freedom of information....

[10 Pence Short]

Utter wkers. We'll find out a lot more about them once they're bombed out of office in 15 months.

[paddyhasneeds]

Jack Straw Said said:

"There is a balance to be struck between openness and maintaining aspects of our structure of democratic government," he said.

"The damage that disclosure of the minutes in this instance would do far outweighs any corresponding public interest in their disclosure."

Strangely ironic statement if you ask me.

We the public vote these people into power, they take decisions on our behalf, but it's not in the interests of we the public to know why?

[shalmaneser]

'If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear....'

Now, where have I heard that recently?

One rule for them, one for us...

disgusting.

[Fire99]

This has the stench of a cover-up. I think people have become more and more suspicious of this Government's workings and this just reinforces that.

I agree with the SNP.. A full enquiry on the basis of the Iraq War is definitely needed!.

[Jazzer77]

Total cover up.
Absolutely disgusting.

[Pesty]

So how much of these minutes will we actualy see?

Before the freedom of information act came out the Labout party were frantically shreding every damaging piece of paper they could get hold of.

[AnotherClarkey]

It wouldn't do anything to harm the concept of cabinet government - just the credibility of this particular cabinet. That is not a justifiable reason for a veto.

[judas]

bbc said:

Releasing the papers would do "serious damage" to Cabinet government, he said, and outweighed public interest needs.

For me, this is the telling sentence. Basically, they're stting themselves that there'll be incontrovertible evidence that they're a bunch of liars and incompetents - that's the damage he's talking about - nothing to do with national security.

Utter, utter s.

[Swilly]

If i were a betting man i would put money on...

These minutes indicating we went to war simply to back the US under a legal umbrella concocted at this meeting;

That the UK Gov and ministers were complicit in and were fully aware of the torture of foreign nationals and British citizens around the world including Guantanamo, and that there are docs in existence that show this;

That David Kelly's death was not suicide;

That this Gov may be the first for many a year to be forced out of power by (or the threat of) civil unrest

[Skywalker]

And a question posted elsewhere...

When did commercial shipping companies get blocked book to transport war machines to places sunny?

A damn sight earlier than the Cabinet made "their" decision and face (Anthony Charles Lynton Blair) spoke factual untruths to parliament

Edited by Skywalker on Tuesday 24th February 23:37

[Morningside]

Something to hide Mr. Blair?

[fastfreddy]

paddyhasneeds said:

Jack Straw Said said:

"There is a balance to be struck between openness and maintaining aspects of our structure of democratic government," he said.

"The damage that disclosure of the minutes in this instance would do far outweighs any corresponding public interest in their disclosure."

Strangely ironic statement if you ask me.

We the public vote these people into power, they take decisions on our behalf, but it's not in the interests of we the public to know why?

Even more ironic is that his title is "Justice Secretary"

[IforB]

10 Pence Short said:

Utter wkers. We'll find out a lot more about them once they're bombed out of office in 15 months.

No, we won't. The Tories supported the Government on this. A load of utter pish though, so much for freedom of information.

[Zod]

These slimes spent their time in opposition complaining about governemnt secrecy, enacted a Fredom of Information statute and now release as little informatuion as, if not less than, the Tory government. I hate them for lots of reasons, but their hypocrisy combined with sanctimony comes top.

[10 Pence Short]

IforB said:

10 Pence Short said:

Utter wkers. We'll find out a lot more about them once they're bombed out of office in 15 months.

No, we won't. The Tories supported the Government on this. A load of utter pish though, so much for freedom of information.

I meant generally. Politically speaking the Conservatives have been an awful opposition.

[RobDickinson]

Hah they wont release the information because it makes the government look bad , incompetent or outright criminals. And this is against the public intrest?

So its inthe public intrest to keep a bunch of incompetent possibly criminal people at the helm?

[collateral]

fking disgraceful

[Mary Mary]

This scandalous decision deserves this thread to be bumped, so <Bump>

Public Interest, you say?

MM