Re:Source of Jim Sheridan reply from Ombudsman

Posted by Pearly Gates on 13 February 2005 at 01:18:23:

In Reply to: Re:Source of Jim Sheridan reply from Ombudsman posted by Dave Mitchell on 12 February 2005 at 09:06:57:

Dave - I do not understand how a newly-elected MED can be bound by a confidentiality decision taken by a previous Board a long time ago - particularly when the main issues which caused the MED to be elected (and AMIPP to be created) were the questionable covert activities of that self-same Board.

Even so, as there is a confidentiality agreement, might its text be published on this website?

What would have happened if a newly-elected MED declined to sign?