Wednesday, July 12, 2006

The local paper today has quite a big story on my criticism of John Prescott, with a picture of me looking suitably concerned outside the Dome. Interesting to see that Nick Raynsford dismisses it as "tittle-tattle"and asserts that "John Prescott has not had any responsibilities about the decisions on super casinos". I thought even Prescott had given up that defence, given it is now pretty obvious that he did oversee relevant Cabinet committees.

(PS I'm grateful to the Blogger-in-Chief, Iain Dale, for mentioning my Dome FOI request on his unrivalled blog)

UPDATE: The other local paper also has a story on this, with a quote from a Council spokesman saying: "Cllr Fletcher has access to information other residents don't have. However, we will answer his questions as soon as possible but we have a policy of not discussing correspondence with councillors in the press".

3 comments:

The Last Boy Scout said...

Nigel, I know that you are currently not allowed to disclose it's contents.

But, was the report good or bad?

Nigel said...

To quote Yes Minister, it was ...er very well typed.

Seriously - nice try, but I'll decline the invitation to incriminate myself and prompt a Standards Board inquiry! All I will say is that it informs the publicly-available submission the Borough made to the Casino Advisory Panel, and has relevant background info to that. Hence, I think it is of legitimate public interest.

The Last Boy Scout said...

Well you can't blame a guy for trying.

Seriously though I agree with you totally on this subkect, and hope you are successful with your FoI request.