Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

[zooterkin]

When did you last see some cop who was at a demonstration or a crime scene, or a firefighter at the scene of a major fire giving an interview to the press or a broadcaster? If they give their identity, they might well be subject to disciplinary measures and it won't wash if they take legal action because trust is implicit in an Employment contract.

Sure, there are people who are stupid enough to do things under their employer's name, like a guy on twitter who in his bio said he worked for Aldi and was posting offensive material.

So, you're backing away from your claim, as per usual?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Every employee in the UK (Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its extended territories) is subject to the Official Secrets Act. Civil Servants sign it to make it explicit of their duty of confidentiality. Even when I was under the Secretary of State dealing with the Insolvency Service I had to sign it.

There is also the inherent concept of fealty.

I am amazed people aren't aware of any of this.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7422/CBP-7422.pdf

So you were wrong, everyone doesn't sign it.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I have a very, very long list of folk who worked in the NHS who didn't sign the Act: Carrot Flower Queen (payroll and IT, so access to mucho personal data and other sensitive things); my parents; my cousin; my sister; my Scouse Bro-in-Law; everyone I trained with or ever worked with in 30-odd years; my next-door neighbour; a couple of other neighbours; all the medical studdents and junior medics I knew at university; me mate's wife; the parents of various of my patients; my local cardiology team; our GPs and practice nurses; the nice bods in Benbecula who assessed me last May; the other payroll and pensions bods I've had to speak to; pharmacists various; porters; catering staff; domestics; even sodding managers...

Shall I start on police officers, social workers, prison staff, members of the services, civil servants and the rest I know or have had dealings with? We could be here a very long time...

Aboard ship there were certain crew members cleared for duty in secure communication and 'special weapons' that had to sign things before they were allowed in restricted compartments.

 

[LondonJohn]

Every employee in the UK (Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its extended territories) is subject to the Official Secrets Act. Civil Servants sign it to make it explicit of their duty of confidentiality. Even when I was under the Secretary of State dealing with the Insolvency Service I had to sign it.

There is also the inherent concept of fealty.

I am amazed people aren't aware of any of this.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7422/CBP-7422.pdf

You're lying.

As has already been pointed out, nobody "signs" the Official Secrets Act (that's a media/uninformed misconception). Rather, people sign to say that they understand that the nature of their work is covered by the Act, and that they are liable to be prosecuted under the Act if they divulge stuff to third parties.

You'd know this if your work had actually been covered by the Act. You're lying. And as for your risible claim that everyone in public service has to "sign the Act" - another bald-faced lie. Why do you lie so much, Vixen? Not to mention your frequent claims to be a seasoned expert at research and accuracy. Lies and wholesale pulling-straight-out-of-your-fundament, more like....

 

[LondonJohn]

So you were wrong, everyone doesn't sign it.

Vixen admits she pulled her "fact" out of her nether regions in

1.....2.....3.....4.....

.....7,304,882.......7,304,883......7,304,884.......

 

[Vixen]

You're lying.

As has already been pointed out, nobody "signs" the Official Secrets Act (that's a media/uninformed misconception). Rather, people sign to say that they understand that the nature of their work is covered by the Act, and that they are liable to be prosecuted under the Act if they divulge stuff to third parties.

You'd know this if your work had actually been covered by the Act. You're lying. And as for your risible claim that everyone in public service has to "sign the Act" - another bald-faced lie. Why do you lie so much, Vixen? Not to mention your frequent claims to be a seasoned expert at research and accuracy. Lies and wholesale pulling-straight-out-of-your-fundament, more like....

As I said several posts before yours:

"Every employee in the UK (Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its extended territories) is subject to the Official Secrets Act. Civil Servants sign it to make it explicit of their duty of confidentiality. Even when I was under the Secretary of State dealing with the Insolvency Service I had to sign it.

There is also the inherent concept of fealty.

I am amazed people aren't aware of any of this.

Quote:
It is not necessary for a person to have signed the Official Secrets Act in
order to be bound by it. The 1989 Act states that a person can be
“notified” that he or she is bound by it; and Government employees
will usually be informed via their contract of employment if they must
observe the Act. Furthermore, members of the general public are also
bound by a part of the Act. Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act 1989
makes it an offence for a person to disclose information specifically
covered by the Act which has been disclosed to them unlawfully by a
Crown Servant.
https://researchbriefings.files.parl...2/CBP-7422.pdf"

But thanks for trying to take credit.

 

[ohms]

With a bit of luck we will know the answer to what exactly happened from next month:

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/about-us/london-luton-airport-review

The task force will be putting together a full report which will include a range of details about the fire and recommendations. The report is due to be released not before April 2024.

That should put the matter to bed for everyone except the delusional people who see conspiracies everywhere.

And just to reiterate:

At this time, we can confirm the vehicle involved was a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). More information on the incident and cause of the fire will be released once the investigation has been concluded.

 

[Vixen]

So, you're backing away from your claim, as per usual?

How do you work that out? On the contrary, I stand by it.

 

[Vixen]

With a bit of luck we will know the answer to what exactly happened from next month:

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/about-us/london-luton-airport-review




That should put the matter to bed for everyone except the delusional people who see conspiracies everywhere.

And just to reiterate:

Thanks, so you see they are already back-peddling (cf my reference to Jasper Jolly).

And just to reiterate:

Quote:
"At this time, we can confirm the vehicle involved was a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). More information on the incident and cause of the fire will be released once the investigation has been concluded."

Which seems to confirm it was indeed an MHEV, [for the avoidance of doubt, a mild EV, diesel or petrol and with a lithium battery] which all of us unwashed masses have been saying and observing with our own two eyes!


I am far too modest to proclaim, 'Told you so!'

 

[GlennB]

Thanks, so you see they are already back-peddling (cf my reference to Jasper Jolly).

And just to reiterate:

Quote:
"At this time, we can confirm the vehicle involved was a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). More information on the incident and cause of the fire will be released once the investigation has been concluded."
Which seems to confirm it was indeed an MHEV, [for the avoidance of doubt, a mild EV, diesel or petrol and with a lithium battery] which all of us unwashed masses have been saying and observing with our own two eyes!


I am far too modest to proclaim, 'Told you so!'

Only in la-la land.

 

[GlennB]

Descartes: I think, therefore I am

Vixen: I type, therefore I'm right.

 

[Steve]

What's the point of having an embargo on information that's common knowledge?

Do you know nothing about running a conspiracy? Contradictions are a crucial element.

 

[zooterkin]

How do you work that out? On the contrary, I stand by it.

This was your claim:

IIRC it was an online local newspaper and it was an opinion from an unnamed firefighter from Harpenden Brigade. As you know, employees are not allowed to speak to the press. Plus the mainstream press rely on official press reports.

What does the Official Secrets Act have to do with that?

 

[zooterkin]

Thanks, so you see they are already back-peddling (cf my reference to Jasper Jolly).

I don't know about them, but you are peddling something, though it's not backs, it's bollocks.

And just to reiterate:

Quote:
"At this time, we can confirm the vehicle involved was a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). More information on the incident and cause of the fire will be released once the investigation has been concluded."

Which seems to confirm it was indeed an MHEV, [for the avoidance of doubt, a mild EV, diesel or petrol and with a lithium battery] which all of us unwashed masses have been saying and observing with our own two eyes!


I am far too modest to proclaim, 'Told you so!'

 

[catsmate]

This is uttter and complete bollocks.

30-odd years in the NHS and I was never, ever, evah required to sign the Official Secrets Act.

In fact, IIRC, no-one "signs" the Act, but some folk (not the NHS) are covered by various provisions of the Act.
I was bound by my professional code of conduct, various rules and regulations about patient confidentiality and specific parts of my contract which forbade me talking to outside bodies about aspects of my employment without having it cleared by Corporate Services. But absolutely had not a single thing to dowith the Official Secrets Act.

Where the buggery bollocks do you get this nonsense?

Well it depends.

Back in 'The Day' when I was collecting various documents (basically the Budget summary and ministerial speech, the evening before it was presented to the Dáil) I had to sign a document stating that I was aware the information I was being given was was subject to the Official Secrets Act 1963 (our version). Of course given that I was a minor most of the times the issue was moot.

The later UKian version (the 1989 act) specifically states that a person is bound by the act without signing it when they are informed ("notified" is the term used) that they are subject to the Act. Subsequent Civil Service contracts include a boilerplate notification, as do most contracts applied to outside staff.
At least those staff who lacked the ingenuity to edit the contract in advance and have it approved without checking.....

 

[JayUtah]

Is this an appeal to the crowd?

Nope.

Pointing out that lots of people have refuted you or otherwise identified for you what they see as the faults in your argument is not the same as a rhetorical appeal to the gallery.

 

[JayUtah]

...you invariably sign the Official Secrets Act to remind you of your duty of confidentiality linked to your job.

Your fellow Britons disagree, so apparently what you're claiming to be invariably true isn't all the "common knowledge" you protest it to be.

Also, how does one "sign" acts of Parliament? Surely if such signatures were required, as you say, from so many people, you wouldn't have any trouble providing an example.

You really don't grasp that everyone can tell you're just spinning a bad spy novel in your head.

 

[JayUtah]

I never claimed to be an expert in firefighting.

You rarely claim to be an expert in anything. When you do, and base an argument upon such a claims, we invariably find it to be a lie.

Most times, you merely act as if you are an expert, and then expect everyone else to go along with it, as the remainder of your post here makes plain. The claim to expertise is implied in your penchant for pretending to be the teacher and Vixensplaining stuff that we're just supposed to take your word for.

...the fact that firefighters can move in and put out an ordinary car fire within ten minutes. Don't try to pretend the two types of fire are identical.

And there you go again, pretending to be an expert in firefighting. Armchair detectives are worse than useless.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

How do you work that out? On the contrary, I stand by it.

You're standing by your false claim that everyone who joins e.g. the NHS has to sign the Official Secrets Act?

 

[Carrot Flower King]

When did you last see some cop who was at a demonstration or a crime scene, or a firefighter at the scene of a major fire giving an interview to the press or a broadcaster? If they give their identity, they might well be subject to disciplinary measures and it won't wash if they take legal action because trust is implicit in an Employment contract.

Sure, there are people who are stupid enough to do things under their employer's name, like a guy on twitter who in his bio said he worked for Aldi and was posting offensive material.

So, no mention of "signing" the Official Secrets Act then. Or of the Act at all.

All you say there is covered by the sorts of things I already noted about T&Cs and specific policies or codes of conduct.

Odd how in all the NHS IG training I had to do and all the trust policies concerning such areas whose drafts I had to review there was never, ever, evah a mention of the Official Secrets Act.

There were a bunch of acts of Parliament we needed to know about but the Official Secrets Act was never discussed at all.