Guest Blogger: Rahul Odedra

Amid the news coming from the expenses releases today and the continued analysis of the pre-Budget report, there’s an important story that’s hardly had any coverage.

For only the second time, Justice Secretary Jack Straw has used his veto to prevent cabinet committee meeting minutes being released, the first time being when the decision to invade Iraq was being discussed.

The committee meetings were held between May and July 1997, during which legislation on devolution was discussed. The argument given for the veto has been that the convention of collective responsibility would be at risk if minutes were released. This indicates that there was opposition to the government’s position on devolution within the cabinet.

In an explanation, Straw argues that future cabinet meetings would be undermined if these minutes were released. “I believe in this case that the interest in disclosure is outweighed by the strong interest in protecting effective Cabinet government and encouraging high-quality decision-making,” said Straw.

Collective responsibility is, of course, an important convention for governments. It makes sure, publically at least, that everyone stays on message, and it could be argued that it ensures an efficient government.

However, should it really be at the cost of transparency? These are not state secrets being protected, nor are they delicate pieces of information that could seriously harm people.

Surely the public would have respect for the government if we saw that there was proper debate behind closed doors? They have protected their own backs today, but, on a day when the media had another field day over expenses, it’s the political class that takes another blow.