Dept of Transport admits: Hoon withholding information about Heathrow from MPs

I recently sent Geoff Hoon an email concerning his statement to the House of Commons on the third Heathrow runway. Whilst I was asking him a rather obscure and pedantic point relating to the language he used, the reply I got is rather revealing.

To that end [deciding about the third runway], the Secretary of State reached his decision on the basis of a transparent and objective analysis of the evidence available as a result of the consultation that has taken place. He alone had the necessary knowledge of all the facts and issues that required consideration.

It would not have been appropriate for Parliament to participate in making the decision. Parliament would not have had access to all of the facts, assumptions and analyses that underpinned his decision.” [emphasis added]

So, Mr Hoon, just what information did you withhold from the UK’s sovereign decision-making body, which is meant to scrutinise your decisions and hold you accountable on behalf of the public?

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

3 Comments

  • David Heigham 11th Mar '09 - 1:03pm

    A Freedom of Information request?
    ‘Please list all the facts, assumptions and analyses that Parliament would not have had access to?’

  • Was just about to say what David H says above. Definitely worth a go.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarPRoberts 14th Dec - 12:38pm
    Paul Walters, have to agree to differ on this point. That said Jo Swinson has gone. She got my vote in the last leadership election....
  • User AvatarAndrew Hickey 14th Dec - 12:36pm
    Agreed with every single word of this.
  • User AvatarJoseph Bourke 14th Dec - 12:32pm
    A progressive alliance can only be justified as a stepping stone toward proportional representation. It has to be remembered that PR normally means permanent coalition...
  • User AvatarRussell 14th Dec - 12:21pm
    I agree that Swinson's 2 big mistakes were Revoke and calling for a GE. On the first point I'm surprised that she didn't listen to...
  • User AvatarRuth Bright 14th Dec - 12:12pm
    Joseph - this is a classic example of not reading the post . It is not MY view that she was too young. I am...
  • User AvatarRussell 14th Dec - 12:12pm
    In NZ the Labour Party and the Greens have a Memorandum of Understanding (so you know in advance they will be in coalition). But NZ...
Tue 7th Jan 2020