User:TFoxton/Sandbox: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
comment out cats |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Nationalisation == |
|||
{{intro length|date=January 2009}} |
|||
The '''Wilson Doctrine''' is a ban on the [[Telephone tapping|tapping]] of [[United Kingdom|UK]] [[Member of Parliament|MPs']] and [[Peerage|Peers]]' (but not members of [[devolution|devolved legislatures]]) telephones introduced in 1966 and named after [[Harold Wilson]], the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|Prime Minister]] who established the rule. |
|||
The franchise is operated by a subsidiary of National Express, NXEC, which is a stand-alone company |
|||
== Introduction == |
|||
Following a spate of scandals involving alleged telephone bugging of MPs Mr Wilson gave a pledge to MPs that their phones would not be tapped: |
|||
{{quote|The government said it would take over the franchise when this missed payment occurred - though this may not be for some months.|BBC News (2009-01-07). "East Coast rail to be state-run". BBC News. |
|||
{{Quote|I reviewed the practice when we came to office and decided on balance - and the arguments were very fine - that the balance should be tipped the other way and that I should give this instruction that there was to be no tapping of the telephones of Members of Parliament.|Harold Wilson, ''House of Commons''}} |
|||
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8127851.stm. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.}} |
|||
{{quote|A ring-fenced business that operates the franchise is expected to run out of money before the end of the year. But O'Toole, who was thrust into the role as former chief executive Richard Bowker quit last week, said the group would continue to try to attract passengers back to the East Coast line and added that as it has not defaulted on its obligations, it was premature of the government to say it would strip the group of the franchise. |
|||
However the pledge was qualified in two respects, as the [[Intelligence and Security Committee]] made clear in their 2005-06 Annual Report: <ref>{{citation|url=http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0607/hc03/0315/0315.pdf|title=Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner for 2005-2006|author=Interception of Communications Commissioner|id=HC 315 SE/2007/17|accessdate=2009-01-12}}</ref> |
|||
He said: "It (nationalisation] is not a definite outcome. The government can't suddenly come along and decide that it wants to take it off us."|Rutherford, Hamish (2009-05-07). "New National Express chief vows to hold on to East Coast route". The Scotsman. http://news.scotsman.com/transport/New-National-Express-chief-vows.5430572.jp. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.}} |
|||
{{Quote|But if there was any development of a kind which required a change in the general policy, I would, at such moment as seemed compatible with the security of the country, on my own initiative make a statement to the House about it.|Harold Wilson, ''House of Commons''}} |
|||
{{quote|Struggling transport group National Express is set to walk away from its loss-making East Coast rail franchise by the end of the year, the firm said today. |
|||
This meant that the Prime Minister could reverse the doctrine in the interests of national security, but that he did not need to reveal the fact to the House of Commons until he felt it safe to do so. In theory this means that the Wilson Doctrine could already have been reversed, with the Prime Minister having decided it was premature to disclose the fact. |
|||
The company has failed to agree a renegotiation of the deal – agreed on over-optimistic assumptions before the recession – with the Department for Transport (DfT). |
|||
== Re-assessment == |
|||
Unless there is a dramatic improvement in trading, National Express said the DfT was likely to take back control of the franchise later this year.|Edwards, Gareth (2009-01-07). "National Express off the rails as line franchise hits buffers". The Scotsman. http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh/National-Express--off-the.5416980.jp. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.}} |
|||
Subsequent prime ministers have regularly confirmed that the ban remains in place, but in January 2006, the then Interception of Communications [[commissioner]] [[The Right Honourable|Rt Hon.]] Sir Swinton Thomas asked the government to reconsider the implications of the [[doctrine]] on the regulatory framework established under the [[Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000]]. Prime Minister [[Tony Blair]] confirmed he would be considering whether or not the ban should be lifted, in order to comply with the act. |
|||
However, in March 2006 - in a written ministerial statement - Tony Blair said that following a period of fresh consultation, the 'Wilson doctrine' will remain in place. |
|||
In February 2007, Sir Swinton Thomas again called for the ban to be removed, <ref name="cia_factbook">{{cite web |author=Richard Norton-Taylor |publisher= The Guardian |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2017037,00.html |title=Watchdog urges end to ban on MP phone taps |date=[[2007-02-20]] |accessdate=2008-02-04}}</ref> saying: |
|||
{{Quote|It is fundamental to the constitution of this country that no one is above the law or is seen to be above the law. But in this instance, MPs and peers are anything but equal with the rest of the citizens of this country and are above the law"}} |
|||
In September 2007 Prime Minister [[Gordon Brown]] reaffirmed the doctrine as "The Wilson Doctrine applies to all forms of interception that are subject to authorisation by Secretary of State warrant."<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070912/text/70912w0013.htm#07091234000025|title=Written Answers for 12 September 2007 - Members: Surveillance|author=[[Gordon Brown]]|publisher=[[Hansard]]|id=12 Sep 2007 : Column 2103W|accessdate=2008-02-04}}</ref> |
|||
== Sadiq Khan MP == |
|||
In February 2008 it was reported that [[Sadiq Khan]] had been bugged whilst talking to a constituent in [[Woodhill (HM Prison)|Woodhill Prison]]. However since this appeared to have been a face-to-face conversation, even if it was bugged, it may not have been a literal breach of the Wilson Doctrine. An inquiry was launched by [[Secretary of State for Justice|Justice Secretary]], [[Jack Straw|The Rt Hon. Jack Straw MP]]. <ref name="BBCN">{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/4075439/Bangkok-Blaze-nightclub-had-no-licence-or-safety-measures.html|title=Police 'took MP bugging decision'|date=2008-02-04|publisher=[[BBC News]]|accessdate=2009-01-12}}</ref> |
|||
Further questions about the validity of the Doctrine arose in November 2008 after the home and Parliamentary offices of [[Damian Green]] MP were searched by the Metropolitan Police.<ref>{{citation|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm081208/text/81208w0004.htm#0812081001524|title=Written Answers for 8 December 2008 Prime Minister Damian Green|author=[[Andrew Mackinlay]]|publisher=[[Hansard]]|id=8 Dec 2008 : Column 12W|accessdate=2008-12-08}}</ref>. Other questions in the Lords asked whether communications which had been stored were protected by the same doctrine. <ref>{{citation|url=http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2008-12-08a.145.0|title=Members of the House: Police Access — Question|author=[[Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer]]|publisher=[[Theyworkforyou.com]]|id=8 Dec 2008 : Members of the House: Police Access — Question|accessdate=2008-12-08}}</ref> |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
==See also== |
|||
*[[Harold Wilson conspiracy theories]] |
|||
*[[Spycatcher]], a book alleging some staff of [[MI5]] plotted against Harold Wilson's government |
|||
== External links == |
|||
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4860850.stm Ban on phone tapping MPs remains], BBC News |
|||
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4614122.stm MP phone tap ban 'may be lifted'], BBC News |
|||
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7225209.stm No 10 denies MP 'bugging' tip-off], BBC News, Feb 2008 |
|||
<!-- |
|||
[[Category:Politics of the United Kingdom]] |
|||
--> |
|||
Revision as of 20:30, 7 July 2009
Nationalisation
The franchise is operated by a subsidiary of National Express, NXEC, which is a stand-alone company
The government said it would take over the franchise when this missed payment occurred - though this may not be for some months.
— BBC News (2009-01-07). "East Coast rail to be state-run". BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8127851.stm. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.
A ring-fenced business that operates the franchise is expected to run out of money before the end of the year. But O'Toole, who was thrust into the role as former chief executive Richard Bowker quit last week, said the group would continue to try to attract passengers back to the East Coast line and added that as it has not defaulted on its obligations, it was premature of the government to say it would strip the group of the franchise. He said: "It (nationalisation] is not a definite outcome. The government can't suddenly come along and decide that it wants to take it off us."
— Rutherford, Hamish (2009-05-07). "New National Express chief vows to hold on to East Coast route". The Scotsman. http://news.scotsman.com/transport/New-National-Express-chief-vows.5430572.jp. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.
Struggling transport group National Express is set to walk away from its loss-making East Coast rail franchise by the end of the year, the firm said today.
The company has failed to agree a renegotiation of the deal – agreed on over-optimistic assumptions before the recession – with the Department for Transport (DfT).
Unless there is a dramatic improvement in trading, National Express said the DfT was likely to take back control of the franchise later this year.
— Edwards, Gareth (2009-01-07). "National Express off the rails as line franchise hits buffers". The Scotsman. http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh/National-Express--off-the.5416980.jp. Retrieved on 2009-07-07.