Reply to: Public Sector or Not?

[cojak]

Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.

No, it does not require analysis - it simply requires reading the list of organisations that fall within the remit of the FOI Act.

That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Anything else is navel gazing.

And as we have returned to the original point of this thread I am now locking it.

[LondonManc]

Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.

Teapot explained why RBS wasn't subject to FOI. You backed it up. Not sure what your beef is because Teapot gave you the correct answer with a supporting statement.

[MrMarkyMark]

Stop sucking off the admins.

I thought NAT seemed a lot happier these days

[northernladuk]

That's a first.

Ones that I can post without a ban then....

[LondonManc]

Words fail me.

That's a first.

[SueEllen]

I think that might be because we've discussed RBS 3 times already including with you last week and nothing has changed during the past 3 months.

RBS is not covered by the FoI act and therefore isn't affected by these changes.

Stop sucking off the admins.

[eek]

Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.

I think that might be because we've discussed RBS 3 times already including with you last week and nothing has changed during the past 3 months.

RBS is not covered by the FoI act and therefore isn't affected by these changes.

[breaktwister]

He hasn't got one. His read something somewhere and has decide to fart it on to the forum without thinking again so others have to clean the thread up again.

Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.

[northernladuk]

A quick google tells me that the gov owns 80% of it only. It is still listed in the stock market as a tradable company which would not be possible if the gov owned all the shares.

Words fail me.

[northernladuk]

Google says 58%, so I don't know what his point is

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&...d+by+govenment

He hasn't got one. His read something somewhere and has decide to fart it on to the forum without thinking again so others have to clean the thread up again.

[breaktwister]

A quick google tells me that the gov owns 80% of it only. It is still listed in the stock market as a tradable company which would not be possible if the gov owned all the shares.

[MrMarkyMark]

So is RBS wholly owned by the Government?

Google says 58%, so I don't know what his point is

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&...d+by+govenment

[northernladuk]

If RBS is wholly owned by the British Government (who acts on behalf of the Crown) then it is a "public authority" subject to FOI act.

So is RBS wholly owned by the Government?

[breaktwister]

For the purposes of the IR35 'reforms', public sector is defined as bodies who are subject to the FOI act, so RBS is out of scope.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations...s-the-foi-act/

In addition to the bodies listed in the Act, with effect from 1 September 2013 the definition of a public authority now also covers companies which are wholly owned:
•by the Crown;
•by the wider public sector; or
•by both the Crown and the wider public sector.


If RBS is wholly owned by the British Government (who acts on behalf of the Crown) then it is a "public authority" subject to FOI act.

[cojak]

Correct, that's the key to it.

FOI act: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations...s-the-foi-act/

Go to the first page of this thread for the actual FOI Act in all it's glory...