How do we do it? do not play their …

Comment posted Council now restricts reasons why agenda item minutes are restricted by John Sinclair.

How do we do it?
do not play their game for a start

John Sinclair also commented

  • “have NO OPTION but to adhere to the requirements of this Act.”
    “just follow the orders”

    http://www.simplypsychology.org/obedience.html

    Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of
    fools

Recent comments by John Sinclair

powered by SEO Super Comments

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Print

21 Responses to How do we do it? do not play their …

  1. What a wate of an article. “It’s a pretty grim picture of the governance regime we exist in” Doh! A goverenance regime that’s been in place since 1973!!! And you are just catching up with it?

    And please – don’t blame the Council! Just because it’s described as a Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973- that disnae mean it was passed by the Council or COSLA or any other of your bogey-man groupings. This is national legislation and councils have NO OPTION but to adhere to the requirements of this Act.

    Of course you would be the very first to mump, moan and complain if the Council did not. :)

    Have a nice day.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • you seem to be implying that the Council have no option here because it’s the law, however am I not right in saying that the restrictions here are not automatically mandatory but subject to a resolution by the Council? The law simply gives the Council the power to exclude certain items from the public if it so chooses. The Council could if it so chooses, opt not to make such a resolution and make the information available to the public, (which would be the default position). The legislation does not restrict the Council from providing a fuller explanation of their reasons for making such a decision. Again that is a matter for them and something they have discretion over.
      Perhaps the minutes of the meeting at which the resolution to exclude specific items might provide the necessary clarity as to their thinking and justification.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Meat for thought.

    There is a trend forming which indicates the ‘public servant’ has become the Master. The MAIN obsticle to public will, as expressed through our politicians. to bring about change for the common good.

    In point of fact often the system even prevents what should be done, being done properly, if at all.

    This extends from Local Authorities, to the Scottish Parliament and on through the Westminster Government to Brussels.

    A pretty mind blowing thought, negative and depressing but none the less true.

    Grant MacDonald eludes to the ”Sir Humphrey” syndrom in another similar article post.Spot on!

    Where do we mere mortals begin to try to fix things?

    How do we do it?

    Any ideas out there?

    Newsroom, do keep going at it, with your reporting, and let’s all join in.

    The good and bad,positive and negative, optimistic and pesimistic.

    All should be embraced. None critised for contributing.

    Answers may materialise.

    Iain

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. John “do not play their game for a start” what are you advocating here?

    That Argyll and Bute Council ignore the requirements of the Act (ie the Law) and print confidential material?

    Or what other “game” were you referring to?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. That misses the point Simon. No-one is suggesting confidential material should be made public but it should not be beyond the wit of council officials to give a reasonable explanation for the confidentiality. The absence of any accountability is unhealthy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Anne, the two examples quoted above give perfectly clear explaanations why some information is restricted. If it is beyoend your ken to understand the definitions of para 1 and para 9 (quoted above) that may go someway to explaining why the electorate rejected you.

    Anyway – if it’s sucha biggie here’s a radical idea – why not get your SNP chums who lead this admisitration to change it? Instead of bleating on here about “the absence of any accountability” nonsense.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Agreeing with Simon does not normally feature in my ‘things to do in the morning’ list but today it does (other than being routinely bored by his inability to avoid resorting to personal jibes).

    The two reasons quoted are the two main reasons for things being restricted and I do agree that it is appropriate that papers along these lines are restricted. A requirement for a specific reason to be given every time is not required and would be time consuming.

    In all my experience of seeing what is and isn’t restricted my overall feeling is that Councils get it right the vast majority of the time. There have been a few times when I have seen restricted papers and wondered why they had been restricted but this has been the exception rather than the rule.

    If Councillors (who obviously do see all papers) feel that the powers are being abused then they are well within their rights to challenge the restriction recommended by Council officers.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • This looks like a case of what Boris Johnson has just called ‘institutional capture’.
      We cannot afford to accept that it is reasonable for an authority not only to restrict access to information but to refuse to explain why that is the case.
      In matters of the highest level of national security this pyramid of restriction might be justifiable – but in a local authority discussing services for the elderly?
      We can neither assume nor hope that we live in a continuing democracy.
      We have to be watchful and ensure that we do.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. What utter nonsense Newsie.

    You really should stop digging! You are either (a) being deliberately obtuse or (b) you really are that stupid.

    You said [my numbering] “(1) We cannot afford to accept that it is reasonable for an authority not only to restrict access to information (2)but to refuse to explain why that is the case”.

    Let’s try to deal with these two points: (1)you cannot accept that this is reasonable. The fact is that all councils are required by Law to restrict access, ie, Councils are required under certain circumstaces to keep matters confidentias. That is requirement of the 1973 Act and whether you accept this or not is really quite immaterial. This may come as a surprise to you but your acceptance or otherwise does not actually preclude councils from carrying out their legal duties. If you want to comlain about the requirements of this Act do so to the SNP Govt.

    (2) “refuse to explain why that is the case” – total rubbish! The Council have not refused to explain why in these examples above they kept matters confidential. They have stated exactly and precisely why some information is being kept confidential and in doing so have probably quoted direct from the requiremtns of the Act.

    Seriously, if you cannot read and understand what the two exaples mean then Neil Kay is probably right and you really are stupid.

    My turn.

    (1) Why do you use the word ‘Now’ in the title? This suggests that this is a novel departure and that (if the rest of your latest bleating post is to believed) this somehow threatens democracy. Keeping restricted matters confidential has been going on for years – so why ‘Now?’ What are you trying to imply? That this is rogue Council doing things off its own back? Or do you have another conspiracy theory you like to share?

    (2) Why do accept a press reelase from Western Ferries that describes some aspects of their business (quite rightly) as being ‘commercially cofidential’ but bleat, moan, mump and complain when the Council does exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason AND quotes from the Act that requires it to do so?

    Anybody fair-minded person would think you were biased against councils in general and this Council in particular… ;)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Stubborn, beligerent, mischief-making, own agenda, prints hearsay, accuses individual officers of actions without a shred of evidence, doesn’t apologise to them, in fact never apolgises regardless of how big a tumshie she has made of herself – rather seeks to justify the rubbish she has printed in the first place.

    And to that list I would also add – sometimes just plain stupid.

    But we can disgree on that if you wish Michael ;)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Simon
    Perhaps you should have a look at a law dictionary (black’s law) for the legal definition of an “ACT” No government or local council have the right to withhold information from their masters (the people) but they get away with it because the people “CONSENT” to follow their acts
    Also you all may learn something if you lookup “John Harris it’s an illusion”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Taggart64 – interesting but somewhat abstract observation on the requirement of consent of the people to be governed being a corner-stone of any democracy.

    Of course to get back to the matter under discussion it still doesn’t remove the obligation of the Council to adhere to the requirements of the Act mentioned. The Council simply cannot choose to ignore the Act – regardless of Newsie’s pathetic protestations

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • I say again….the act does NOT require the Council to keep matters from the public ( in fact quite the contrary)….it merely gives them the power, in limited and specific circumstances, to do so if they choose (if they pass a resolution to that effect)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • “interesting but somewhat abstract observation on the requirement of consent of the people to be governed being a corner-stone of any democracy.” LOL we are ruled by consent my friend
      You freely consent to their corporate rules (oops statute laws) you freely hand over your power as an individual and accept there gifts of rights and privileges. But you try to discredit me with the above comment lol
      Your councillors are elected members of our local community/society to serve the people of our society yet our councillors serve the EU, or UK society rules so they no longer serve you or I but their masters in the EU UK or UN corporations and force their rules on to us.
      Its time we woke up and put our government back in it box as our servant and stop them play as our lord and masters

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.