The excat nature of alleged cofidential information are submissions given by both parties at thie Nominations and Conduct c'ee hearings..i.e
Re Harm suffered if disclosed. I would say none. Indeed it could be of benefit to the Trust...as I could peruse and tuck in results of perusal into my guidelinesRe data that could be used positively to identify...NoneAddress would not be disclosed..etc
No the main committee meeting the governors council is not confidential.
But the chair of the Trust keeps the Nominations and Conduct C'ee meetings confidential...No observers...No substantive reports even with anonymised names..comes to the main Council.
But another factor is Governors are elected to this Nomainations and C Committee.
Now the officers say they are elected to conduct confidential matters.But there are is aConstitutional porvision in the Terms of Reference...accountability to the main meeting...
Another aspect,,,,,inconsistency the voted in Governors are trusted with confidentiality..others not!!!
The notes I guess are owned by the Trust Secretary.
Possibly I have authority..Public represetantive requesting information.
The Chair of the Trust and Senior independent Director are only witholding through insistence to keep confidentiality
It is protocol that Nominations and C, Committee meetings remain confidential.
But under the constitution of this committtee need not be!
No the key point is we have a one off situation...my request....triggered by one party leaving the trust.
I guess no precedent.
Compelling reason that this should change..yes in so far as this provision for accountability to the main committtee.
compelling reason because of my request No. But I repeat a one off situation
Sorry to give more than one thread