Multinational Chairman's Group - all is revealed?
Ever heard of the Multinational Chairman's Group? I hadn't either.
It does sound a little like the kind of shadowy yet powerful organisation which is believed by some to control the entire world, but from what I can make out it seems to be a lobbying group of big bosses who occasionally meet the Prime Minister to argue their corner.
We may soon know more about it, as the Information Commissioner has the Cabinet Office to reveal some background briefing material relating to the meetings. However Downing St won't have to disclose the speaking notes officials prepared for Tony Blair, partly because he might not actually have bothered to read out the points that his minions felt he ought to be making.
One interesting little detail of the judgment is that whoever requested the information did so on 4 January 2005, the first working day of the FOI era. And I thought we were meant to live in a time of instant gratification.
The Commissioner's announcing the judgment, issued today, focuses somewhat surprisingly on the information to be withheld not that to be released.
It's the latest in a series of 'dog bites man' with a topline angled on the Commissioner backing public authorities when they have kept information secret. Anyone would think that the Commissioner is trying to get a reputation for protecting secrecy.
A 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
Welcome back Martin
Quote "Anyone would think that the Commissioner is trying to get a reputation for protecting secrecy" Unquote.
2005? They sound so optimistic when you request a ruling - 7 months nearly and no sign of my request being considered. My newspaper is daily having tremendous fun at my expense because of the oddities I found in the late MPs book. Callous malign journalism but I cannot stop reading it in hope of some clarity.
Which the Information Commissioner is certainly not hurrying to give me. Beechholme was the large childrens home I used to live in.
Subject: Bush's lethal legacy: more executions
Anagram: Beechholme - O gainsay - excell - trust us
Subject: Lawyers claim Michael Jackson owes them money
Anagram: Lo, my ace - seems ATM cash machine will work - enjoy
2005? Boy I have still quite a wait and then it will be NO!
Protecting Secrecy? I have mulled that over and still find it odd. This Britain of mine has a whole other world - mainly for the nations safety but can it be used for small mean things too?
I am led to believe no partaking by an individual is necessary for their life to be messed about with in the Courts of this land. "My day in court?" That is funny. The opposition can fight you from the shadows and never come forward with any charges you can defend.
But secrecy of action suggests to me weakness - subterfuge and if the oppostions case is so weak - how can that happen seemingly forever in Courts of Law? Which again I am led to believe is happening? Plus private arrangements between friendly elements being interfered with. As I said - small and mean - allegedly!
Is it enough to protest as long as you can pay the bill for said legal action? Well I am afraid I am beat then. Where is the "enemy" brave enough to come forward and throw percieved untruths back in my face and ask me to back them up? Justice by the back door. Happening in the margins.
Yes, protecting secrecy seems to fit in my case at least.
I am going to have to start fighting dirty, in honour of the late Elvis Presley - "Cos I don't have a wooden heart" or be anyones Teddy Bear! LOL