Lindsayp wrote:.. it does break the IT security policy.., so should have disciplinary consequences for Ministers the same as for civil servants/contract staff.
ah, but, at that time the MP was 'only' a Shadow Spokesman, not a Minister. Thus, technically, he was 'self-employed', as all MPs except Ministers and (senior) Government Whips (and the Leader of the Opposition, who has a salary as such) are. Thus, he could not be 'disciplined' then as an employee by any sort of 'HR' action. Any 'discipline' could only come, then and now, through his Party (National or Constituency). The media coverage suggests that this could now be problematic for his Leader
[of course, I do know and should mention that he has denied downloading or viewing even legal (at the time) 'porn' using a computer in that office. If that denial is disbelieved by the Cabinet Office investigators, or his Leader, his false denial may be regarded as a more serious offence than any original 'porn']
For a Civil Servant (to my knowledge, from a fairly recently retired local CS senior HR bod), and I assume for any employee in the public sector and presumably many private companies, viewing even legal 'porn' at the workplace or using work-provided facilities would certainly invite disciplinary action, and in many Civil Service ones likely dismissal.
On the other issue raised, the actions of the retired Police Officers: AIUI (but happy to be corrected), the recent sequence of events was: the senior Officer conducting the 'leak' investigation which lead to the seizures at Portcullis House (which were presumably with a Warrant
and with the permission of the Speaker) recently published his memoirs, in which he repeated the allegation about 'porn' which had been made at the time; the MP repeated the denials which he had made at the time; another Officer, who had been the one who actually examined the seized PCs then described what he had found, which was download and viewing of (legal) 'porn' thoroughly mixed in adjacent timings with correspondence both private and official from the MP. This did not 'prove' that the MP had done it, of course, as the Officer admitted. The Officer was thus publicly defending and corroborating his colleague who had just been equally publicly accused of malicious mendacity by the MP. I understand the Officer's dilemma.
And, finally, yes, sharing passwords is a bad idea, and was unnecessary even then with a properly organised set-up and trained and disciplined users. But MPs did not and do not have to accept any training nor discipline from mere 'officials'
(mere guide at) Jet Age Museum, Gloucestershire Airport
http://www.jetagemuseum.org/TripAdvisor Excellence Award 2015
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction ... gland.html