Home Office internal review - Identity Cards Programme meeting agendas etc.

| 2 Comments

The ongoing saga of the Home Office Identity Cards Programme has resulted, at last, in an Internal Review a letter and a printout via snail mail, rather than via email.

Do you think it is worth complaining to the Information Commissioner ? Bear in mind that the Information Commissioner has taken months and is still considering another of our FOIA requests, relating to the non publication of the Office of Government Commerce Gateway Reviews of the Identity Cards Bill.

UPDATE 27th December 2005:

The most interesting stuff is the "dog which did not bark in the night" i.e. the meetings which are missing. On the evidence of this FOIA disclosure, it does not seem as if the policy of

"the need for extensive consultation to ensure that Ministers receive the best advice available and that correct decisions are taken."

has been adhered to.

There do not seem to be any meetings by these senior members of the Identity Cards Programme team specifically with other Central Government Departments, or the
Office of the e-Envoy / e-government unit. There do not seem to be any meetings with the Treasury to discuss the estimated costs of the porject.

Where are the meetings with the Office of Government Commerce Gateway Reviewers, a process which takes at least a week ?

Also notable by their absence are any meetings with civil liberties or IT secuiry and privacy experts,.

Obviously some or all of these "missing" groups could have been in contact with the Identity Cards Programme Team via other methods apart from official face to face meetings, e.g. email, phone, letter etc.but one would have expected any people or groups whose views were considered important by the Identity Cards programme Team to have merited several meetings.

Email us if you are interested in seeing the full disclosure, an anodyne sample of which is published below:

Home Office
Information and Record Management Services
Information and Technology Management Unit
4th floor, Seacole Building, 2 Marsham Street, London
SW1P 4DF
Switchboard 0870 0001585 Direct Line 020 7035 nnnn
E-mail AAAA@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk www.homeoffice.gov.uk

Our Ref Annnnn/n
Your ref
Date 12 December 2005

[address]

Dear Mr XXX

Freedom of Information - Internal Review Request

Thank you for your request for an internal review dated 28th April 2005. Please accept my sincere apologies for the length of time it has taken to respond to the internal review request. The response has been excessively delayed for which I apologise.

Your request for an internal review relates to your original freedom of information (FoI) request dated the 31st January 2005. Your orginal request asked for:

Official meeting diaries, agendas of meetings and travel and entertainment expenses of the senior members of the Home Office Identity Cards Programme team including Catherine Courtney, Stephen Harrison and whoever fulfilled the role of the new post of head of Marketing, ideally from 11 September 2001.

Your query relates to the length of time it took the Identity Cards Programme to answer your request, your request was submitted in January and a full response was not provided until April. You also suggest that the Public Interest balance should be reviewed in light of the Parliamentary answer given to Mark Oaten, which listed over 60 organisations the Home Office ID Card Programme team had meetings with or attended seminars or trade shows. At least the reference to the written answer in Hansard should have been provided.

I have now completed the internal review of the decision to withold all of the information relating to official meeting diaries, citing S35(1)(a) Formulation and development of government policy. I have not reviewed the application of the cost limit in relation to the agendas of meetings held since 2001 as I understand from your review request that this is not an issue you wish to question. I have however advised the Identity Cards Programme that it may have been in the spirit of the Act to advise you to refine the scope of your request so that it falls below the the £600 cost limit threshold.

In relation to the delay in providing a full response to your original Freedom of Information request. The papers I have reviewed that update letters were issued on the 28th February , 9th March and 14th April 2005. These letters did not outline that the Identity Cards Programme was considering the public interest test in relation to Section 35.

The substantive response was sent outside the 20 working day deadline stipulated within the Act. The Identity Card Programme should have indicated in the letters, apologising for the delay that they were assessing the public interest in relation to specific exemptions. They should have provided details of the exemption they were considering (Section 35) and when they intended to provide you with a substantive response. Policy Units across the office have been reminded that when considering the Public interest they should ensure that applicants are informed that the public interest test is being applied and of a reasonable date by which they can expect a full response. I am now confident that these letters are being issued as a matter of course by the identity Cards Programme. This request was processed in the early implementation phase of FoI when procedures were bedding in within the Department and this is the only justification for the delays in processing your request.

The Freedom of information Act was passed into law in the year 2000.

The Home Office might reasonably have been expected to have developed standardised procedures and training before the Act came fully into force on 1st January 2005.

In relation to the second part of your request, which asks for the public interest balance to be reviewed and suggests that the Identity Card Programme should have given the Parliamentary Question response provided to Mark Oaten.

Parliamentary Question re Identity Cards Programme meetings

I have now had the opportunity to review the information requested, the exemption applied (S35) (1)(a) and the public interest arguments put forward by the Identity Card Programme. As a starting point I would like to agree with your assertion that it may have been preferable, and in the spirit of the the Act for the Identity Card Programme to refer you to the Parliamentary Question response provided to Mark Oatem. I have consulted with the Unit and they have indicated that they would have been happy to provide these details had they felt your request was asking for this information. The ommission was not a deliberate attempt to withold information, but rather a different understanding of the scope of your request.

As outlined in earlier correspondence, Section 35 is included in the FoI Act to ensure that the information and development of government policy can proceed in the self contained space needed to ensure that it is done well while enabling proper public participation in policy debates. The exemption is designed to protect the policy making process and to ensure that this process remains able to deliver effective government. I have now had the opportunity to review all the relevant papers. I am happy to inform you that there are some extracts of information that can be released to you as a result of this internal review. Please find this information in Annex A. I feel that these extracts fall outside the scope of S35.

Whoopee ! After all these months !

I do however uphold the use of S25 (1)a) in relation to some of the information held within these calendars.

When applying S35(1)(a) it is necesssary to take a view of the public interest considerations that must be weighed in considering whether or not information should be released. The arguments in favour of releasing the information centre on the impact of the ID cards Programme and the need for extensive consultation to ensure that Ministers receive the best advice available and that correct decisions are taken. In general the release of information relating to policy development increases transparency, trust and makes the government accountable to the electorate.

Agreed !

The key public interest arguments against disclosure are that meetings held by the Identity Cards Programme are integral to the free and frank exchange of views in relation to Identity Cards policy. The release of calendar appointments, including details of policy meetings that have already taken place may have a negative impact on future meetings of a similar nature. The meetings contained within the calendars discussed ideas in relation to Identity card policy and, in a number of instances ongoing discussions which are yet to be finalised. The release of this information therefore would be premature. Future lines of discussion in relation to the pros and cons may be shut off if third parties beleive that information relating to meetings taking place would be released to the public at such an early stage.

It is widely agreed that policy advice should be broad and information should be witheld if there may be a deterrent effect on external experts or stakeholders who might be reluctant to provide advicebecause it might be disclosed. Future meetings are likely to be hindered by such a disclosure and third parties may be dissuaded from attending or offering their opinions freely. The free and frank exchange of views and the consultation of policy experts and stakeholders is integral to the policy development process and ensures that Ministers receive the correct advice in relation to planned policies.

For properly impartial advice on both the pros and the cons of such a policy as the Identity Cards Programme, which will literally affect every single person in the entire United Kingdom personally, there should be a balance of opinions and experts.

If the Identity Cards Programme team was mostly meeting with, say, Government Departments and Commercial Companies who were likely to be bidding for multi-billion pound contracts, and not meeting with, for example academic experts and people with privacy and security fears about the proposed scheme, then Ministers would not be getting the correct advice.

That is primarily what was sought through this Freedom of Information Act request,

In addition to witholding information based on S35, the details of personal appointments of the Identity Cards Programme Management team have been witheld as this is personal information.

N.B. the FOIA request was for the official meeting diaries etc, not for personal visits to the dentist etc.

This information is exempt from disclosure by virtue of S40 (3) (a) (i) of the Freedom of Information Act. This section relates to the disclosre of information which would contravene any of the data protection principles. Releasing details of staff's personal appointments would contavene the first data protection principle which relates to Information being lawfully and fairly processed. In this instance I believe that it would be unfair to the data subjects to the data subjects to release such details. In addition to personal appointments, meetings with third parties which provide personal details and.or relate to Identity Card personnel matters have been witheld. Again this is due to the fact that releasing this information would be unfair to third parties.

Due to the above points I am satisfied that the application of S35 (1)(a) is correct in relation to the information withheld. I must therefore, after careful consideration uphold, in part, the response provided to you by the Identity Card Programme on the 6th April 2005. As outlined above under internal review I am also satisfied that it is necessary to withold some information citing S40 of the Act.

I appreciate that this may be disappointing to you. Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you have a right of complaint ot the Information Commissioner as established by Section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Information Commisioner
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 3AF

Yours Sincerely

AAAA
Information Policy Team

Appendix A consists of a 36 A4 page printout which we are still trying to analyse e.g.

    Head of Marketing

In none of the correspondence from the Home Office has this "Head of Marketing" ever been named ! Does he or she really exist ?

So much for the culture of openness and transparency.

16 - 22 August 2004

Catch-up meeting

23 - 29 August

Catch-up meetings
Review Risk Register
Work stream leaders meeting
Feedbacks
MS reminder

30 August - 5 September

Catch-up meetings
Work stream leaders meeting
Planning session

6 - 12 September

Feedback on online marketing strategy
Work stream leaders meeting
Catch-up meetings
Model review

13 - 26 September

Catch-up meetings
Work stream leaders meeting
Process changes

27 September - 3 October

DVD meeting
Catch-up meetings
Work stream leaders meeting
Update session

4 -10 October

Catch-up meetings
Work stream leaders meeting
Updates
Review risk register

11 - 17 October

Catch-up meetings
Work stream leaders meeting

and so forth for another 35 pages.

2 Comments

You ask whether you should complain to the Information Commissioner. There seems to me to be an important question here over whether official meeting diaries etc. can be released given data protection requirements, so I think a complaint to the Commissioner at least to clarify that point would be worthwhile.

Bridesmaids gifts can be anything from Designer Knockoff Handbags

Leave a comment

About this blog

This United Kingdom based blog has been spawned from Spy Blog, and is meant to provide a place to track our Freedom of Information Act 2000 requests to United Kingdom Government and other Public Authorities.

If you have suggestions for other FOIA requests,  bearing in mind the large list of exemptions, then email them to us, or use the comments facility on this blog, and we will see  what we can do, without you yourself having to come under the direct scrutiny of  "Sir Humphrey Appleby" or his minions.

Email Contact

Please feel free to email us your views about this website or news about the issues it tries to comment on:

email: blog @spy[dot]org[dot]uk

Here is our PGP public encryption key or download it via a PGP Keyserver.

WhatDoTheyKnow.com

WhatDoTheyKnow.com - FOIA request submission and publication website from MySociety.org

Campaign Buttons

cfoi_150.jpg
Campaign for the Freedom of Information

NO2ID - opposition to the Home Office's Compulsory Biometric ID Card
NO2ID - opposition to the Home Office's Compulsory Biometric ID Card and National Identity Register centralised database.

Watching Them, Watching Us, UK Public CCTV Surveillance Regulation Campaign
UK Public CCTV Surveillance Regulation Campaign

Peaceful resistance to the curtailment of our rights to Free Assembly and Free Speech in the SOCPA Designated Area around Parliament Square and beyond

Parliament Protest blog - resistance to the Designated Area restricting peaceful demonstrations or lobbying in the vicinity of Parliament.

irrepressible_banner_03.gif
Amnesty International 's irrepressible.info campaign

Yes, Minister

Yes, Minister Series 1, Episode 1, "Open Government" First airtime BBC: 25 February 1980

"Bernard Woolley: "Well, yes, Sir...I mean, it [open government] is the Minister's policy after all."
Sir Arnold: "My dear boy, it is a contradiction in terms: you can be open or you can have government."

FOIA Links

Campaign for the Freedom of Information

Office of the Information Commissioner,
who is meant to regulate the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Scottish Information Commissioner,
who similarly regulates the Freedom of Information Act (Scotland) 2002

Information Tribunal - deals with appeals against decisions by the Information Commissioners.

Freedom of Information pages - Department for Constitutional Affairs

Friends of the Earth FOIA Request Generator and links to contact details for Central Government Departments and their Publication Schemes

UK Government Information Asset Register - in theory, this should point you to the correct Government documents, but in practice...well see for yourself.

Access all Information is also logging some FOIA requests

foi.mysociety.org - prototype FOIA request submission, tracking and publication website

Blog Links

Spy Blog

UK Freedom of Information Act Blog - started by Steve Wood, now handed over to Katherine Gundersen

Your Right To Know - Heather Brooke

Informaticopia - Rod Ward

Open Secrets - a blog about freedom of information by BBC journalist Martin Rosenbaum

Panopticon blog - by Timothy Pitt-Payne and Anya Proops. Timothy Pitt-Payne is probably the leading legal expert on the UK's Freedom of Information Act law, often appearing on behlaf of the Information Commissioner's Office at the Information Tribunal.

Syndicate this site (XML):

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

  • Designer Knockoff Handbags: Bridesmaids gifts can be anything from Designer Knockoff Handbags read more
  • Henry Potts: You ask whether you should complain to the Information Commissioner. read more

November 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Categories