The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan would have to write very clearly at the top of his letter, ““I am writing this as a Member of the House of Commons””, or ““I am writing this as a Member of the Scottish Parliament.”” If he wrote the letter as First Minister, he would be writing as a member of the Government, and there are Government exemptions within the scope of the original enactment. We would need to check whether his letter was written as from the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan, as from the MSP for Gordon, or as from the First Minister. Does it contain personal information? Does it contain policy discussion? Is that policy discussion based on information that he has received from the civil service in Edinburgh, in which case it may be exempt information, or is it from the Government here, in which case it falls into a completely different category? There are all sorts of complexities, and I wish I had not started thinking about it. The more I do so, however, the more I realise that this whole area requires the Bill to be recommitted, because it fails to address the new and important issue about hon. Members with dual membership. However, that has nothing to do with amendment No. 2.
Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Heath
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 18 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c906 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:13:10 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398088
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398088
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398088