MPs attack Brown's bid to withhold Royal letters
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Gordon Brown's plan to impose a blanket ban on all public requests for correspondence written by the Royal Family has been attacked by the Information Commissioner and MPs.
Christopher Graham, the recently appointed watchdog for the Freedom of Information Act, told The Independent that it would be "unfortunate" if the Prime Minister's proposal became law.
Under the new measure mooted this year the Royal Family would be granted full exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act so that requests for documents would no longer be subject to a public interest test.
Yesterday the Information Commissioner ruled in favour of The Independent's request for the release of more than 100 secret letters and memos between the Queen and the Government. They relate to the Royal Family's claims for public subsidies for the upkeep of the royal palaces. Under the new law requests such as this would be blocked.
Mr Graham said yesterday: "Recent decisions have shown that royal correspondence can be protected by the law of confidence and by existing constitutional conventions.
"But the role of the Information Commissioner in determining where the balance of public interest lies could be relevant in particular cases. It would be unfortunate if a blanket ban were to be enacted."
So far, 65 MPs have signed an early day motion to try to force the Government to back down on the ban.
Graham Smith, of the anti-monarchy group Republic, said: "The Government is making the extraordinary claim that the interests of the Windsor family are more important than those of the public. In a democracy the public interest must trump all else."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments