Democracy holds the govt to account?..
 

Not any more...

Theresa May’s government is overhauling the 100-year-old Official Secrets Act. Last updated in 1989, the Official Secrets Act determines what punishment is given to people who leak sensitive government information.

In 2015, the UK government tasked the Law Commission with reviewing the act. On 2 February, the commission published its findings and its alarming ideas for reform. Whistleblowing, or leaking, is a crucial check on power. And such checks are essential for democracy to thrive.

But the UK’s democratic system is under threat. And if the government accepts these suggestions, it will destroy the last bit of democracy we have left.

May’s crackdown

At present, unauthorised disclosure of classified information carries a maximum sentence of two years in jail. The commission believes the maximum sentence should be raised. The Telegraph reports potentially up to 14 years. And while currently the law only applies to UK citizens, the commission advises it should apply to anyone, anywhere in the world.

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/02/06/...ver-democracy/

When it comes to corruption, whistle-blowers are our last line of defence. The government works for us and as our servant, needs to be seen as an open and transparent office. Instead, it cloaks itself in secrecy and often gets up to no good.

These are the initial proposals https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/ and comments from the public are being taken until the 3rd April

My response to the government is, if you become more transparent with your British public, there would be no work for whistle-blowers!

'destroy the last bit of democracy we have left'


Fake news

Trust is dead! Bad pay killed him!

the canary?

and there is you with the DM placard

:joker:

brilliant

So the independent Law Commission consults widely with intelligence agencies and civil rights groups to make suggestions to improve and update the Official Secrets Act because much has changed since it was last updated in 1989. Sounds perfectly reasonable but in Canary language "if the government accepts these suggestions, it will destroy the last bit of democracy we have left". That sure sounds like a reasonable and level headed conclusion.

Pathetic website.

We can go on any political website and read about the new 'espionage law' (that's its new title)

I fully understand that for safeties sake, certain information should be guarded from public view but what about government lies; what about false flag operations and deliberate deception?

Like I said, if government deception stopped, whistle-blowers would be out of a job.

I know. This from people wanting a democratically elected Western leader banned from the UK, and who would overturn the democratic choice of the majority to leave the EU.

I've signed the Official Secrets Act. I'm sure a lot of people have, some on here maybe. If you have signed it, you'd better have read it. It's only needing to be tweaked because some people sign it and then break it. Maybe a bit more of a deterrent is required to protect people, agents in the field etc.

Hush hush these things don't happen and even if they do Daddy Government knows best and it will only be to keep us safe and who are we to question Him he only has the best interests of the average everyday citizen at heart. Do you want to be unsafe? Safety is paramount and it's important to remember that you know very little, if anything, about anything and simply surrender your wellbeing to the big fellas in-the-know. You'll be much happier for it, I promise.

It gets tedious doesn't it?

Why is it fake news,because you say so...

is it happening or not? if it is by definition it isn't fake news.

I wish you would address me directly I would rather that than you snipe from the sidelines to be fair Livia.

Where is the assurance that this only applies to documents under that umberella and not simply things deemed to be in the public interest.

The leaks that are passed to the Telegraph are not viewed with such derision, specifically the fake news regarding conversations during the last election between a certain Scottish first minister and A N Other....
All that will stop too no doubt?

Pathetic because it holds the govt accountable for it's actions that could impact on us negatively, as in reduced access to information NOT under official secrets?

I would post a link to a pathetic website.. but you know, but can't be seen to be breaking my own code of ethics can I? :)

The low sentence for betraying the official secrets act is not 'the last bit of democracy that we have left' as stated on that site that you quoted.It is a ridiculous statement and an outright lie.That quote shows just how un-impartial and agenda driven that site is.So yes by adding ridiculous lies that article is fake news.
And people want the Mail banned from SD.I think before that happens we should cage The Canary:laugh:

I wasn't addressing you. I didn't quote you. I posted in a thread that happened to have been started by, but does not belong to, you.

What would be the point of addressing you, you have never changed your mind about anything, you've never considered anyone else's point of view, you make your mind up and no amount of experience or information will ever make you think, hmmm... that's a good point... unless it directly mirrors what you already think.

Always assume I'm not talking to you.

'At present, unauthorised disclosure of classified information carries a maximum sentence of two years in jail. The commission believes the maximum sentence should be raised. The Telegraph reports potentially up to 14 years. And while currently the law only applies to UK citizens, the commission advises it should apply to anyone, anywhere in the world.'

Holding a govt to account is democracy, the proposal is the threat of autocracy.

See the quote? That applies to everyone everywhere, not those who have signed the official secrets act..everyone.

Big brother is watching you, but if you watch him you go to jail for 14yrs.

You came here and lied, you stated I would overturn the brexit decision... I don't own the thread but I don't appreciate being gossiped about in threads I start that have nothing to do with brexit.
If we could leave it there I don't want my thread closed and you've made yourself very clear, I hope I have too.

You? Where did I am ANYTHING at you? I was referring to the author of the piece and the owners of the dubious site you posted. I resent the fact you have called me a liar, but I am not a bit surprised.

Now you've got that off your chest perhaps you can learn to ignore me. Hope so.

I'm so used to being referred to as some people I've learned to respond to it maybe?
The site is not dubious, you have no reason for saying so or for your brexit comment towards the site, nor have you addressed the points I raised in response to your points raised regarding the official secrets act.

If you choose to comment in a thread I start there is a possibility I will respond to a point you raise, this is the nature of debate.

NM what we can all confirm
is Kizzy 's link
is not from Proper News Source
so it can not go onto TV news

Facts are needed
and must be Checked etc

If anyone signs the official secret act then that's what it is, an official secret.
If they break the rules then two years is not a high enough penalty to pay for some disclosures.
I see no problems here.

You are not qualified to confirm anything
with respect.
It is not fake news
It is a proper news source.

If this site is not dubious, then I have to uphold the ligitimacy of the Daily Mail. They are equal in my eyes.

Back at you as you were the first to throw allegations of fake news about a video on here about a guy filming the protests to Trump in London. Was that fake news because you say so then? Blatant hypocrisy in my book.