Talk:Organisations and officials with public responsibilities that are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(tidy up of suggestions)
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Do we want to include:
==Possible additions to the list==
'''Please include your suggestions below.'''


==Elected Representatives==
 
===Bodies/companies/organisations===
 
*The Association of Police Authorities===
(The Association of Police Authorities was set up on 1st April 1997 to represent police authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, both on the national stage and locally.  It influences policy on policing and it supports local police authorities in their important role.) http://www.apa.police.uk
*stemnet?
 
===Elected Representatives===
*Members of Parliament  
*Members of Parliament  
*Councillors paid for full time roles eg. Some Executive Councillors / Council Leaders in London
*Councillors paid for full time roles eg. Some Executive Councillors / Council Leaders in London
*The Mayor of London  
*The Mayor of London  
 
*Members of the Scottish Parliament
Members of the Scottish Parliament
*Members of the Welsh Assembly
Members of the Welsh Assembly
*Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly
Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly
 
 
My view is that those who are not in paid full time roles ought not be subject to the act.
Obviously correspondence with constituents is exempt in any case.
 
*I don't think we should - all the information MPs hold that might be released should be held by the Commons anyway [[User:John Cross|John Cross]] 12:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 
==Others==
 
 
ACPOS?
 
SDEA?
 
 
 
==More for Consideration==
 
===The Association of Police Authorities===
The Association of Police Authorities was set up on 1st April 1997 to represent police authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, both on the national stage and locally.  It influences policy on policing and it supports local police authorities in their important role.
 
Personally I am aware that they provide guidance on things like how to run a Police Authority during an election
 
http://www.apa.police.uk
 
 




==Royal Mail==
Consensus was that those who are not in paid full time roles ought not be subject to the Act. It was noted that correspondence with constituents would be exempt in any case.  It was also noted that information that was clearly held in an official capacity would in almost all cases also be held by a public body as well.
Even if it were to become a private company, not subject to the Act, it may retain its powers to conduct covert surveillance under RIPA.


(One to watch in case it is privatised)


==Spying Contractors==
Any companies or individuals performing covert investigations on behalf of organisations able to operate under RIPA


==stemnet?==
==Royal Mail (if privatized)==
Even if it were to become a private company, not subject to the Act, it may retain many of it public functions (e.g. powers to conduct covert surveillance under RIPA). One to watch in case it is privatised.

Latest revision as of 19:50, 21 November 2010

Possible additions to the list

Please include your suggestions below.


Bodies/companies/organisations

  • The Association of Police Authorities===

(The Association of Police Authorities was set up on 1st April 1997 to represent police authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, both on the national stage and locally. It influences policy on policing and it supports local police authorities in their important role.) http://www.apa.police.uk

  • stemnet?

Elected Representatives

  • Members of Parliament
  • Councillors paid for full time roles eg. Some Executive Councillors / Council Leaders in London
  • The Mayor of London
  • Members of the Scottish Parliament
  • Members of the Welsh Assembly
  • Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly


Consensus was that those who are not in paid full time roles ought not be subject to the Act. It was noted that correspondence with constituents would be exempt in any case. It was also noted that information that was clearly held in an official capacity would in almost all cases also be held by a public body as well.


Royal Mail (if privatized)

Even if it were to become a private company, not subject to the Act, it may retain many of it public functions (e.g. powers to conduct covert surveillance under RIPA). One to watch in case it is privatised.