Tuesday, 28 June 2016

"Keep it Under Your Hat", the Secret World of Conservation

If a public body refuses to disclose basic information it is a strong indicator that something unacceptable is happening. If you can't be open what do you have to hide? For public bodies such as SCC and publicly funded charities to refuse to disclose basic information tells us something else. It shows that officers supposedly serving in public roles are shockingly badly educated in the fundamentals of how you go about your duties in public positions. Do they even understand what transparency and accountability are and why they are of vital importance?

God help them if they ever get into a situation where their own civil liberties are under threat.

Both SRWT and SCC have refused my request for details about their public engagement group known as a 'conservation group', even the most elementary information such as who they are and when they meet. As it was officers of both SRWT and SCC got together to agree to set this up they both know what's happening. Yet SCC our own 'democratic' council whose officers are paid through public taxation refuse to tell me anything at all about this group. Officers go further and claim they hold no information about the 'conservation group'. This is either a deliberate lie or it is evidence of complete disfunctionality within that department or both. The most obvious evidence of this is that they had previously given me a copy of an email which showed conclusively that they did receive information about this group.

One thing I've noticed about some of the more challenged post-holders I've tried to discuss things with is that they try to hide unprincipled behaviour behind an admission of inefficiency and incompetence. There's always some credibility about this because they are generally pretty incompetent anyway.

My Freedom of Information request to SCC asking for details of SRWTs 'conservation group' meetings was responded to with a statement that they have no details. I have now asked for an Internal Review. Response to that should be within 20 working days.

No comments: