A whistle blower is a person who exposes secretive information exposes an illegal act. In 1998 Parliament passed the Public Disclosure Act which protects whistleblowers from punishment by their employer. The act was notable in that it protected whistle blowers who had signed a non-disclosure agreement with their employer.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Response rates from 2.4k Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.
92% Yes |
8% No |
88% Yes |
8% No |
2% Yes, but only if releasing the information does not threaten our national security |
0% No, but reduce their sentences |
1% Yes, but only if the information was legally obtained |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 2.4k Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 2.4k Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Non-Civil Parish or Community voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@8SQV9TV4yrs4Y
Yes if it was legally obtained and if it doesn’t threaten our national security
@9Q635785mos5MO
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.
@9GHFFBN1yr1Y
Yes, but only if the information pertains to breach of UK laws, or international treaties/agreements/laws/organisations the UK is party to
@9G5MCLJ1yr1Y
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.
@9DSC38J1yr1Y
It depends on the illegal act
@9DLN48B1yr1Y
It would depend a lot on the specific instances. Whistle blowing deemed unnecessary should have consequences
@9PXZW995mos5MO
It depends what they are blowing the whistle on. Those reporting things such as abuse in care homes should certainly be protected.
@9PRKV7L5mos5MO
Yes - as long as sufficient evidence is supplied and the company is found guilty of the illegal activity
Join in on the most popular conversations.
