Tav's IPSA Saga
Tav over at the WFA has already given an account of what started his enquiry to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority and what a drawn-out process this became. However I felt it necessary to re-emphasise his final main paragraph.
IPSA has requested that he not publish the final conclusion.
This is a public body created in the wake of the MPs expenses scandal to monitor their expense claims and answer Freedom of Information requests made regarding such, but it appears any such information provided by them comes with a 'please don't publish this' addendum.
As it seems that unlike the Press Complaints Commission IPSA doesn't publish the results of any enquiries even in a cursory manner the only way to determine the result is to wait and see if anything changes on the relevant index for Mr Garnier.
Most unsatisfactory.
2 comments:
If I ever undertake some investigative journalism, such as in this case, then I always add the option for the recipient(s) to use the 'Not for Publication' clause. It would be unfair and dishonorable if I reneged on this after offering out the opportunity in the first place.
I can’t believe I'm saying this but let's give the IPSA a few days to publish the information to the public. It states on their website that transparency is one of their principle values, so I don’t see why they wouldn't publish the findings.
"then I always add the option for the recipient(s) to use the 'Not for Publication' clause."
Except why would they take you up on it if they're going to publish the conclusion themselves? In a similar regard where exactly do the results of any complaints/queries get published? The compliance website seems to be more geared towards MPs and offers nothing about the results of any inquiries.
Post a Comment