High double standards, a prerogative in Wales where ...

....  do as I say, not as I do, is the preferred way of  Carwyn and chums ...

In June, Health Minister Lesley Griffiths said she would be instructing all seven local health boards (LHBs) in Wales to publish their own corporate risk registers on their websites to :

... assess the likelihood of each risk ..., assess the impact ..., and have counter-measures in place should a risk become reality...

Carwyn Jones [the first minister] personally turned down a BBC Wales request under the Freedom of Information Act to see the government's corporate risk register.

... he said its disclosure would cause "substantial harm".

The registers are a list of all risks an organisation faces, here it is our Cardiff Bay administration.   

The risks assessed include financial, security and IT,  though not restricted to the three important considerations.

The chair of the assembly's public accounts committee, said...

"It smacks of double standards".

 ... the administration said ...

"Publishing risk registers may also appear to legitimise possible but unlikely risks"

"This could prejudice and distort informed public debate about important issues which in turn could have an impact on the conduct of public affairs"

Now myself, I have a need to see the truth, to see the difficult decisions governance deals with each day, I don't have a problem with political warts, I particularly have a need to judge the decision makers by their real actions not the spin.

It's a black day for democracy when political tyranny becomes the norm.

How long before the next election ? 

Is UKIP standing in Caerphilly at the next election ?

Freedom of Information ...

... (FoI) can be denied by politicians and their civil service familiars, the most recent undemocratic democratic is none other than Alex Salmond, our "Separatist in Chief" of those who would destroy a country.

Those who favour the separation of Scotland, have built their case on several foundations to reassure the gullible of Scotland that it would be business as usual following a "Yes" vote in favour of independence.  One such fallacy is a relationship with the European Union that would be guaranteed, a by-blow of the UK's membership, Salmond has expressed a certainty that membership would follow independence as night follows day.

There are those that are very sceptical of Salmond's certainty, one is Labour MEP Catherine Stihler who made an FoI request last May, asking the Holyrood administration for any legal advice it had received on the issue.

Ministers refused to reveal whether the information was held.

In the interests of Democracy ...

... the Salmond administration cited Section 18 when it refused to reveal whether the information was held. This can mean the information would be exempt from release or the authority considers its release would not be in the public interest.

... but Rosemary Agnew, the country's Freedom of Information Commissioner, said ...

... In the commissioner's view, the role of [the FoI Act] is important not only in ensuring transparency in information held by public authorities, but also in enabling transparency in information about process.  
In this case, the commissioner considers that it is in the public interest to know the type of information that the ministers were taking into account in developing policy in relation to such a significant issue as independence

Salmond is under the impression that the electorate should believe his word, the Freedom of Information Commissioner thinks otherwise, myself ...

... together with every other citizen of the UK, is more than capable of coming to a conclusion when given sufficient information, we are not illiterate peasants of a medieval society, and as there is nothing of national security involved there can be no reason to hide the information.

Of course, if Salmond wishes to pursue his illusions, his political smoke and mirrors with kilt, then he needs to keep the electorate in the dark .......