Author Topic: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?  (Read 4977 times)

ole razzy

  • Guest
Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« on: May 18, 2010, 09:30:12 PM »
In tonight's JEP; MINISTERS are gearing up to fight the introduction of a new Freedom of Information Law on the grounds that it will cost too much.

http://www.thisisjersey.com/2010/05/18/freedom-of-information-will-cost-too-much-say-ministers/

So I would ask how much more out of touch can the CoM be with public opinion on this matter and how stupid do they take the electorate for by claiming that cost alone is the reason for going against PPC's proposals?

There are times when they really do seem hell bent on portraying themselves as some old school 'polit bureau' type cabinet with a Chief Minister who is only wheeled out for State occasions in the forlorn hope that the masses are none the wiser to the fact that he passed away (in this case politically speaking) years ago.


Offline Dylan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1672
  • HELP!
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2010, 11:03:31 PM »
At least Tel's not pissed all the time like Yeltsin, that is of course unless he is just drunk with power!
!dereggub si draobyek ym kniht I

Offline man in the street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2010, 12:21:57 AM »
i belive if we knew the whole truth , there would be near riot.
before  joe soap can cast his eye over anything the shredder will be hard at work(not in the public interest)
 even india has a freedom of information act , for what its worth.
 what do you think about the  possible  opening, hours for the freedom of information office.
monday to friday 0900 to 10.00 and 16.30 to 17.30
post written application forms in the box provided.

rogueelement

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2010, 12:42:29 AM »
It would be interesting to know the cost of suppressing freedom of information. how many people are employed going.. "oooh , no can't show em that " er no way , far too sensitive for the plebs " Is it just one person in charge or are there many who decide?
Never mind the cost of releasing information,,,,, what is the cost of the the ****s suppressing the information!! ( I do love PJ s auto vulgarity suppressor,**** **** ****)

Offline Calimachon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Gender: Female
  • http://www.amnesty.org.uk/
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2010, 12:03:07 AM »
At least Tel's not pissed all the time like Yeltsin, that is of course unless he is just drunk with power!

Yeltsin?

What time warp are you in?

Cali :(
TOMORROW (Noun) = A mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation an achievement is stored

Offline tonytheprof

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Gender: Male
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2010, 01:58:55 AM »
A relatively simple matter would be - like the UK - to have the register of members interests online. At present you have to go into Mourier House, and take a pen and notepad when looking at the ring binder, during opening hours.

Scanned and online - if the UK can manage it with all their MPs, how hard would it be for Jersey?

It would be a start.

[At the moment, our government under the elderly Terry Le Sueur looks like the Brezhnevian Stagnation.]




Offline man in the street

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2010, 02:48:46 AM »
if you work,  who has the time to go , with a note pad, this is the kind of rubbish i am talking about,  i belive, but don't quote me that if you are unemployed, there is still no leaflet in social security informing of every entitlement to you, a young person who has  just left highlands , with good grades and no job to go to, has had  a total load of twaddle foisted on the to prove their existance, to get a bit of allowance.
it may take another decade , for the truth to be out here in jersey.

Offline tonytheprof

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Gender: Male
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2010, 05:32:59 AM »
Well, I can go in my lunchtime, and over about 2 lunchtimes take note of most of the information.

But it is public domain, and it would take no time at all to scan to PDF.

Most of it is trivia, but there were one or two interesting facts. Of former States members, whom I will not name, one has property in Sark, and the other bought a flat to let out for rent at the West Park Dandara flats (where Inn on the Park used to be).

But a lot of it was vague "investments in shares" which is a lot less informative than UK MPs are allowed to get away with. True, it may not be majority shareholdings by any means, but it might still be of importance in assessing how they consider matters elsewhere.


Offline Chevalier Blanc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1850
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2010, 03:59:01 PM »
Look at the brass name plates on the buildings in St.Helier then look up who are directors of that company, back in the 70's there was loads of members who held a directorship with out doing anything and got £100 for it. Now some members had about 30 or 40 directorships not bad for doing nothing. What do they pay today? Shenton Snr. had about 100 when in the States. Also never paid a penny for the use of States equipment on the Harbours ( cranes etc ) but charge the customer for the use of his employees.

Offline tonytheprof

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Gender: Male
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2010, 04:45:54 PM »
1) If any members have directorships now, they are in the register of members interests.

2) Since the new Company Law was introduced, defining the responsibility of directors (and with significant liability for the management of the company if anything untoward came to light), most of the "nominee directors" (also known in Sark as the "Sark lark") have ceased. If directors act as "nominees" and accept instructions, they are legally liable for carrying out those instructions and for anything the company does. That knocked the practice on the head.

rogueelement

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2010, 05:48:43 PM »
In actual fact the practice was knocked on the head by the Jersey Government realising that huge sums were being paid to Sarkese for no other purpose other than to have a majority of Directors "offshore" = outside of Jersey . They simply introduced legislation to eliminate the requirement for offshore Directors ,so that Jersey people could act as Directors of what became "Exempt" companies , thus at a stroke , The Sark Lark was put to bed.

Offline tonytheprof

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Gender: Male
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2010, 05:11:06 PM »
The new companies law of the 1990s and the raft of controlling legislation in its wake, saw Jersey nominee directors diminished as nominee directorships became less attractive owing to the massive increase in responsibilities and liabilities of directors.

Nominee shareholdings were still held, but the lucrative market in directors' fees had diminished. In place of the limited company, the new financial vehicle for tax avoidance was the trust, and by the 1990s, trust companies predominated the market.

Basically, the Jersey Company Law brought the Island in line with the UK Company Legislation, which effectively removed the concept of a 'Nominee Director'.

A person or a body corporate appointed to act as a Nominee Director owes a fiduciary duty to the company even though their appointment is as a nominee only.

Offline Dundee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2011, 12:22:50 AM »
Not sure what happened to the FOI law P 101

I did e mail Constable Gallichan a few weeks ago asking this question, but I had no response, I guess its restricted information  :D

I am continually being refused information that should be in the public domain, in fact the civil servants seem to gain some pleasure in denying it, the only reason it is not is because it is of commercial interest for it to remain closed. Which is no excuse.

Offline Calimachon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Gender: Female
  • http://www.amnesty.org.uk/
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2011, 12:30:24 AM »
Even if we had a FOI law they would come back with the line that the information would not be in the interests of the public to be made public.  A friend in the UK requests information all the time and she freqently gets denied information. 

It was a former diplomat who drafted the very first Data Protection law here. I think he knew what he was doing.
TOMORROW (Noun) = A mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation an achievement is stored

Offline Dave Sanglotte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
Re: Freedom of information laws - to expensive to implement?
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2011, 01:51:41 AM »
...the only reason it is not is because it is of commercial interest for it to remain closed. Which is no excuse.

Interesting observation which has a corollary with PFI projects in the UK. Before PFI you could raise an FOI request about government projects - how they are being run, how much they cost etc - but now they say they cannot tell you because it is commercially confidential.

This follows a trend in the West to privatise much of the State which results in a perversion of the democratic process, not least in relation to war and security. Private firms get covered by the same blanket of secrecy and immunity from prosecution that normally applied to the military.

A recent case is the cyber-attacks on the WikiLeaks servers, which were hosted on public ISPs. Cyber attacks are illegal but nobody is interested in finding out who is doing them against WikiLeaks, although all the signs are that they are emanating from the US government or private firms hired by them. Yet they are hunting down and prosecuting the 'members' of Anonymous who responded in kind.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/02/11/campaigns/index.html