You will probably be aware that Gordon Brown announced the government will introduce a blanket ban on access to all royal documents for 20 years, removing the current public interest test. The royal family is already kept under unacceptable secrecy, being excluded from the Freedom of Information Act, however at the moment some documents can be released on the grounds of public interest - this will not be possible under the new rules.
The Ministry of Justice's amazing excuse for this intolerable increased secrecy surrounding an unelected head of state and her family who absorb taxpayers' money and are not accountable or transparent in how they do so, is to 'ensure the constitutional position and political impartiality of the monarchy is not undermined'! As we can all jalouse from the passionate interference of Charles Windsor in every cause and hobby horse that moves him, what they actually mean is the apparent impartiality of the monarchy. They must hide what these unelected, privileged, wealthy, highly positioned and powerful people are actually doing. What an irony that this comes from the Ministry of 'Justice'!
This will come before Parliament in primary legislation, I'm writing to ask that you ensure to oppose it when it does and please could you pass on my concerns to Jack Straw, Secretary of State for Justice.
Thank you very much.
Reprinted from the Republic Blog www.republic.org.uk Tim Cooper Says:
ReplyDeleteSeptember 18th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
My giddy aunt. What transparent totalitarianism is this? "ensure the constitutional position and political impartiality of the monarchy is not undermined"
And in doing so, those who seek to make these untouchable people accountable, see clearly where the public money is going and illuminate the dark corners currently preventing any form of proper democracy, are thoroughly frozen out.
There are numerous assumptions here. Firstly, it is assumed that a statement such as this is wholly acceptable and forms part of a public notion of democracy; it speaks for the people and whilst there is a fair level of support for the monarchy (although current statistics are unreliable and challenged) those who may oppose it are routinely marginalised or discounted.
The government assumes that censorship, and being selective in what information is made available, does not dilute the spirit of the FOI act in any way in the eyes of the public. They will somehow mystically understand that it is their own best interests. On the one hand it is claimed that the monarchy is apolitical, on the other, sensitive information clearly exists which needs to be protected. If that information is not political, what is the purpose of making it unavailable?
The government further assumes that the public will swallow the notion that protecting certain 'important' information which might otherwise undermine the monarchy's 'impartiality' is wholly disconnected from seeking to obstruct those campaigning democratically for constitutional reform, by making it as difficult as possible. What sort of information might this be? If it can be demonstrated through access to information that evidence exists which might support constitutional reform, who is the government working for, its electorate or the monarchy?
Since 'the royal family' is publicly-funded, claims to represent the people of Britain and has the monopoly on who will be the Head of State, the public must be entitled to access any information regarding its state workings, finances and relevant documents. Its intentions should be transparent and clearly understood. There should be no unminuted meetings between politicians and dynastic members. Since no political dimension apparently exists, the Privy Council should be scrapped and its more routine aspects, such as overseas appointments demystified and carried out elsewhere.