Not A News Qs

[Bobbisox1]

As a BT pensioner , same as my husband , we both had to sign the official secrets act when it was the GPO
As minions of this great country of ours, How come people like Dominic Cummings can ‘spill the beans’?
Do those in Westminster do this?
Curious ……

[gness]

Don't know about Westminster, Bobby but one of my children has had to sign it.
Lord, but it's annoying. Nothing will break them....even threats of leaving them out of the will! ;-)

[Mamyalynne]

I believe there were many discussions in the higher echelons about whether action could be taken, the decision so far seems to have settle on not wanting to make him into a martyr.

Take from that what you will.

[Bobbisox1]

It was many years ago when I had to Gness, I wasn’t even sure of what secrets I knew of :0(
I’m really quite curious whether or not those in Westminster had to

[Bobbisox1]

I suppose the ‘treason’ thing exists in name only then Mamya?

[gness]

Well if those in Westminster do, Bobbi they're not making a very good job of it are they.
Can't think what my child would know either that I don't know and being nosy I want to know. :-)

[jno]

you were working for the country, he was working for the Conservative party. It isn't treasonous to be anti-Tory, at least not yet.

[Mamyalynne]

Possibly, but in this particular case - if it hit the courts then much more could tumble forth.

Dilemmas.

[Bobbisox1]

I’ve no idea why I had to sign it Gness but then I ‘had’ to be in the Communication Union as well :0))) or else :0)

[Bobbisox1]

Yes! but do they sign it jno?

[jno]

I don't see why they would, Bobbi. Do Labour party employees have to sign it? Highly unlikely! The party's just a private employer. They may their own rules about use of information acquired in the performance of their duties; but I don't know what they are.

[Bobbisox1]

Cheers jno :0)

[Buenchico]

Under the 1911 Official Secrets Act, it was illegal for anyone who had been 'notified' that their actions were covered by it to disclose any official information without lawful authority. (There wasn't, and never has been any requirement for an individual to sign a document confirming that they'd received such notification). As the law stood at that time, and up until 1989, it was technically illegal for someone to simply disclose to a mate how much they were charged for a biscuit from a tea lady in Whitehall offices.

In 1989 though the law was revised. Persons who have been 'notified' (often by the terms of their employment) that their actions are covered by the Official Secrets Act can now only be prosecuted where the information they unlawfully disclose relates to
a) security and intelligence ; or
b) defence ; or
c) international relations ; or
d) information which might lead to the commission of crime ; or
e) 'foreign confidences' ; or
f) the use of special investigation powers under the Interception of Communications Act 1985 and/or the Security Services Act 1989.

Where information does not fall within one of those six categories, or where a person hasn't been 'notified' that their actions are covered by the Act, they can't be prosecuted using the Official Secrets Act.

[albaqwerty]

An aunty who had the sign the OSA reckoned it was just in case she was transferred to a different department (in Westminster) where secrets might be involved, by the time she retired she was pretty miffed :-)

Sometimes makes me curious when reporters say ''sources close to..' who are the sources?

[lady-janine]

I had to sign it as well. Not sure whether the behaviour of some people absolves me or not.

[Canary42]

It's called Open Government, something the politicians are forever promising us.

[jno]

alba, if the sources are "close to Boris" I suspect it's the Downing Street cat. If the sources aren't themselves the person on whose behalf they're speaking, they're likely to be spouses or very close colleagues or on occasion official spokespeople when the boss himself is scared to say anything.

[Ken4155]

I signed it prior to my 3rd tour of Ulster when i joined the Regimental Intelligence Section where i was privy to some quite sensitive documents.
Prosecutions for breaching the order are quite rare, with fewer than 1 per year going to court. I guess it all depends on the severity of the breach.

[jno]

so you have no comment at all on the Tory Party Summer Orgies, Ken? Wise.

[THECORBYLOON]

I had a quick look through the 1911 Act and couldn't see anything saying folk had to be notified in order to be covered by the Act.

[Ken4155]

I've said what i had to say on the relevant threads, jno :-)