12. LETTER
TO
THE
PERMANENT
SECRETARY,
HOME
OFFICE
FROM
THE
DIRECTOR
OF
PROPRIETY
AND
ETHICS
TEAM,
CABINET
OFFICE,
25 MARCH
2009
You and I have discussed the issue of access to police
protection records in relation to the complaint received by the
Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards relating to the Home
Secretary. […] also phoned me about the issue.
Throughout our discussion, we have been clear that
the investigation is a matter for Parliament and we would not
wish to do anything which could be seen to be obstructing the
inquiry. We have also been acutely aware of the Home Secretary's
wish to be as helpful as possible to the Parliamentary Commissioner
as he conducts his investigation. However, it is also the case
that there is a read across to the Home Secretary's ministerial
responsibilities as both the official diary and provision of protection
relate to her ministerial role. Therefore, both the Cabinet Office
and Home Office have an interest.
In terms of Ministers' diaries, I can think of only
one occasion where we have provided access to an external body
to a Minister's diary and that was to the Information Commissioner
[…] It was agreed to allow access rather than provide a copy
on grounds of privacy and security. This request raises similar
issues as [ … ] the Home Secretary […] in receipt of
protection and as a result […] diaries will contain some
very personal information. However, I can appreciate in this case
how a ministerial diary may provide an evidence base to establish
the Home Secretary's movements, and therefore agree it should
be provided to the Commissioner for the purposes of his investigation.
However, I am not aware of any instances where protection
logs have been provided. This is not information which departments
have access to and of course they are not assembled for the purposes
of providing an official record (unlike ministerial diaries).
You would be better placed than me to comment on the impact of
providing access on overall policy on personal protection, but
I would have thought it raised difficult issues. Therefore, my
preference would be to rely on the ministerial diary in the first
instance and to fall back on the protection logs if at the end
of the process, the Commissioner feels further clarification is
needed.
25 March 2009
|
