On 23/12/11 09:31, Stephen Booth wrote:
On channel 4 news last night they interviewed an previous cabinet secretary and
cabinet minister. A point both made was that what was put in the minutes was
not what the ministers actually said. The secretary takes general notes then
later records in the minutes what they believe the ministers would have said
had they given it full consideration and been in possession of all the facts.
Based on that I see no reason why the later release of minutes should impede a
full and frank exchange of views. Should a minister say something unwise (and
be on the good side of the cabinet secretary) it will be redacted to something
wise before being committed to paper.
Or as Sir Humphrey would put it:
"The purpose of minutes is not to record events, it is to protect
people. You do not take notes if the Prime Minister says something he
did not mean to say, particularly if it contradicts something
he has said publicly. You try to improve on what has been said, put it
in a better order. You are tactful."
Paul
--
Paul Waring
http://www.pwaring.com
_______________________________________________
developers-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
Unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
