2011/12/23 Mark Goodge <[email protected]>: > > Indeed. The question to Scarborough BC about the number of cheques sent and > received is very relevant, given proposals by the banks to phase out > cheques. But it's also a perfect example of a question which can't simply be > answered by making all the council's documents publicly available to begin > with.
Holes cut into doors of toilet cubicles is another (a really serious problem in some places - its the kind of behaviour that has forced re-design of changing rooms for instance). > > The difference is that the councils can no longer just give a non-committal > reply to the nutters and then file the request in the round receptacle. > That is what section 14 is supposed to be for. A request that is clearly frivolous - such as plans for dealing with a santa crash - can just be ignored. In practice most public authorities did send some kind of response and what they did before the act is almost certainly sufficient to comply with the act now. -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ 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
