Should the government pass laws which protect whistleblowers?

Yes, but only if the information was legally obtained and Yes, but only if releasing the information does not threaten our national security.

Yes, if the information was legally obtained and if releasing it doesn't threaten our national security.

Yes they should. Whistle blowing is mostly encouraged in most industries, therefore protection should be given.

It depends on the illegal act

It would depend a lot on the specific instances. Whistle blowing deemed unnecessary should have consequences

Yes if it was legally obtained and if it doesn’t threaten our national security

Whistleblowers need protecting once validated. National security needs to be protected but there needs to be an elected independent body or jury to decide what is threatening to national security. Not government.

It depends what they are blowing the whistle on. Those reporting things such as abuse in care homes should certainly be protected.

Yes - as long as sufficient evidence is supplied and the company is found guilty of the illegal activity

Yes but only if done through appropriate means, not putting the country at risk by going to the papers

Whistleblowers need to present substantial evidence of the finding, should be protected and may have to go into government protection

Yes, for any and all whistleblowers. Whether that be Political, Millitary, Criminal Justice or Private Business whistleblowers, they should be protected from any kind of prosecution and should be kept in safe custody. After what's happened with the boeing whistleblowers where they were clearly assassinated before their trials, And David McBride in Australia who was convicted to prison time because he exposed the USA and Aus Governments of major scale war crimes. We as a country can't allow this to happen.

Yes, but only if the information pertains to breach of UK laws, or international treaties/agreements/laws/organisations the UK is party to

Whistleblowers should be protected. If the information was obtained illegally, sentence them but with reduced sentences. If the information does threaten national security, it depends on the situation whether they are protected or not.

Neither, whistleblowers should be encouraged if it’s sincere, at if so protected by public but it’s a part of society mainly used against a government or private entity, equal justice under law.

Whistleblowers take a risk and should be praised if they brought forward information
sincerely but sadly many are bound by legal contracts including private contracts (which should be reviewed by government oversight) or national security (official secrets act) but they should have the right to defend themselves in a court of their peers if vindicated people should have the right to form…  Read more oversight of government (if what they found is credible laws should be enacted so it doesn’t stop), judges and whistleblowers should have rights to pretext identity in court.

I do believe we should as it will limit corruption within the government

No but make a law that protects foreign whistleblowers

Governments should take a serious look at how companies gag employees by contractual binds. If companies are using illegal means and there are negative and fatal ends to their practice / whistleblowing should not be punished.

Judge on a case by case basis

Whistleblowers should never face punishment, otherwise it allows abuse to carry on

Yes, but only if the information is backed up with verified proof.

Yes, provided that the information they provided, or in providing the information, they have a risk to their/loved ones lives.

Yes if the information is released to the public

Yes, but only if the information does not threaten the life or lives of individuals

Ban whistleblowers

Governments should not do anything

Things would currently stay as they are, unless a petition was successful in getting a vote via Liquid Democracy.

No, and whistleblowers should be sent to prison for a full life sentence.

Yes but only if the information they leaked was legally obtained, they acted within the constraints of the law and it does not threaten the UK’s national security.

I don’t understand

No, a non disclosure agreement is a contract based on trust and for someone to break said trust after having signed a legally binding document, they should not be protected. If there is a chance they might speak simply refuse to sign the document

Abolish the state

Yes! The current system stops people from stepping forward

Yes, but only if the release of information doesn’t put undercover operatives at risk.

The governance of the UK needs reform. From party based to independent based advocacy system. At present system is dependent on sponsorship and so action is tied to rich lobbyists.

Yes but ensure private investigations are launched to ensure the information revealed to pubic by whistle-blower is true. If information revealed by whistle-blowers is false ensure charges can be pressed

Depends on nature of issue

I don't think it requires government intervention

Yes, for legally obtained information which doesn’t threaten national security.

yes but the information should be confirmed as true.

The government should not be able to prosecute

There should be an official channel with an independent authority to verify and release information while allowing whistle-blowers to keep their identies secret, furthermore all whistle blows must be made public without redaction (only comment).

snitches get stiches

Whistle blowing can annoy some people so I suggest they do it inside I know there’s a Ukrainian saying that if you whistle you’ll have no money but it’s either have no money or don’t whistle

Yes, but only if releasing the information does not threaten our national security, and have a separate governing body which will determine whether it will affect the national security.

Yes, the state should not punish people.for releasing information which is in the public interest, even if that information was obtained illegally.

Only if the concern was genuine and was not a case of, "someone dared tell a joke" or "someone expressed an opinion which I don't like."

We already have legislation. It just isn’t enforced. Whistleblowers are victimised, not supported.

yes but only if the information is proof of illegal activity

Depends on what the whistle blower was talking about

The government should be dissolved with immediate effect.

Yes provided the whistleblower can be shown to have acted in good faith.

Harder sentences

Yes, but the whistleblower's name must not be mentioned in the media after the prosecution of the employer.

Yes, I believe that there should be an anti-corruption law set up. This would include the provisions to protect and encourage whistleblowers, as well as penalties for any person or organisation that engages in corruption. There would be a strengthened national interest in free speech, anonymity for whistleblowers and the transparency of corporations and the government. I would make sure that whistleblowing is a legally, and socially protected right.

Yes. Whistle blowers are fundamental to our Democratic process.

The UK should pass comprehensive and unconditional laws that fully protect whistleblowers from retaliation, provide them with legal and financial support, and establish a truly independent body to investigate their claims, thereby dismantling the hierarchical culture of secrecy and holding power to account in the public interest.