Cabinet Office
1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQ
T +44 (0)20 7276 2294
foi.team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
www.cabinet office.gov.uk[name]
[email address alias specific to this FOIA request]FOI Reference: FOInnnnnn
18/08/2015
Dear [name]
I refer to your request where you asked:
"1) What is the financial budget allocated to this Commission,
between its announcement in July and when it is meant to report in
November 2015 ?
2) How much money is the Chair and each member of the FOI
Commission to be paid?
3) Is this an hourly rate or a fixed term contract?
4) Are travel and subsistence expenses to be paid separately?
5) How many hours or days will the Chair and members of the FOI
Commission be expected to work between now and November?
6) Is the Cabinet Office providing office and secretarial support,
or is the FOI Commission establishing their own independent
secretariat ?
7) What are the public contact details of the FOI Commission, so
that members of the public can supply them with evidence of how the
Freedom of Information Act works or fails in practice?"Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
I can confirm that the department holds the information that you have asked for, and I
am pleased to provide this to you.1) The cost of the Commission will be accounted for when the Commission reports
therefore section 22 applied (information intended for future publication).
2) The Commissioners and Chair are unpaid.
3) Not applicable.
4) The Commissioners are entitled to the reimbursement of reasonable travel
expenses.
5) This is for the Commission to determine.
6) The Commission has a dedicated secretariat. The Commission and its secretariat are located in Ministry of Justice office space.
7) The contact details for the Commission can be found on their website page:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-commission-on-freedom-of-informationIf you have any queries about this letter, please contact the FOI team. Please
remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request or wish
to request an internal review, you should write to:[name of civil servant]
Head of Knowledge and Information Management
Cabinet Office
1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQ
email: foi-team@cabinetoffice.gov.uk
You should note that the Cabinet Office will not normally accept an application for
internal review if it is received more than two months after the date that the reply was
issued.If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may apply directly to
the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the Commissioner cannot
make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by
Cabinet Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AFYours sincerely
FOI Team
Cabinet Office
Note how
]]>HM Revenue & Customs
Complaints, FOI & DPA Team
s1177
PO Box 198
Newcastle
NE98 1ZZ
Phone 03000 567151
Fax 03000 577655
Email: [name of civil servant] @hmrc gsi.gov.uk
Date: 17 August 2015
Our Ref: [FOI nnnn/15]
Email: [email address]
Dear [name]
Request for information under the Freedom of lnformation Act 2000 (FOIA)
Thank you for your request, which was received on '19 July 2015, for the following
information:
"Copies of the full text of the 80 "Writs of Assistance" which are currently available for use by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern lreland, the underCustoms and Excise Management Act 1979 section 161
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/2/section/161or other equivalent legal powers in force prior to the Customs and Excise Management Act
1979, in the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth ll.N.B. This is NOT a request for any sensitive details of any any ongoing investigations."
I am answering under the terms of the Freedom of lnformation Act 2000 (FOIA).
Writs are issued at the commencement of a Monarch's reign and are issued.by-the courts of the three UK jurisdlctions, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern lreland The wording,
granting the authority to use the power, is the same on all writs.
The annex is reproduced here for your reference.
lf you are not happy with this reply you may request a review by writing to HMRC FOI Team, Room 1C/23,100 Parliament Street, London SWIA 2BQ or e-mailing
foi.review@hmrc.qsi.gov.uk Youmust request a review within 2 months of the date of this letter. lt would assist our review if you set out which aspects of the reply concern you and
why you are dissatisfied.
lf you are not content with the outcome of an internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The lnformation Commissioner will not usually
consider a case unless you have exhausted the internal review procedure provided by HMRC. He can be contacted at The lnformation Commissioners Office, Wycliffe House,
Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
[name of civil servant]
(by e-mail)
Annex
Elizabeth the Second, BY THE GRACE OF GOD of Great Britain, lreland and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Queen, Defender of the Faith To all and singular Our Officers
and Ministerse who now or hereafter shall have any office, power or authority derived from or under the Commissioners of Our Admiralty or Our Lord High Admiral of Our United
Kingdom for the time being; as also all and every Our Vice-Admirals, Justices of the Peace, Provosts, Sheriffs, Constables, Bailiffs and all other Our Officers and Subjects whomsoever
within every City, Burgh, Town and County of Scotland, and the lslands and Territories thereto belonging; and to every of you; Greeting. Whereas by Commission or Letters Patent
under the Great Seal of Our Realm, bearing date at Westminster the First day of November in the first year of Our Reign, Our Trusty and Well-beloved Sir William Dawson Croft, Knight
Commander of Our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Knight Commander of Our Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Companion of Our Most Eminent Order of the lndian
Empire, companion of our Royar Victorian Order, Arthur Douglas Owen, Esquire, Companion of our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Charles William Hardisty, Esquire,
Companion of our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Arthur Wood Taylor, Esquire, and Francis Noel Roberts, Esquire, Companion of Our Most Excellent order of the British
Empire, were constituted, appointed and assigned to be Commissioners for and during Our pleasure, for the collection and for the management of Our Revenue and Customs and Excise
in and throughout the whole of Our United Kingdom; and by the said Commission or Letters Patent is given and granted unto the said Commissioners full power and authority
respectively to do and execute all matters and things, which by any Act or Acts of Parliament, or by any Law, Usage or Custom for the time being in force, the Commissioners
of Our Customs and Excise are or may be authorised and empowered to do, to the end that all and singular the duties of Customs and Excise and also all and every the Sums of Money
and other premises may be duly paid and answered.We therefore strictly enjoin and command you and every one of you that, all excuses apart, you and every one of you permit and suffer the said Sir William Dawson Croft, Arthur
Douglas Owen, Charles William Hardisty, Arhur Wood Taylor and Francis Noel Roberts, or their Successors in office as Commissioners of Our Customs and Excise and the Deputies,
Ministers, Servants and other Officers of them the said Commissioners, or of their Successors in office as aforesaid, from time to time as they shall think proper, on any day,
as well by night as by day, but not between the hours of 11 o'clock at night and 5 o'clock in the morning except in the company of a Constable, to enter any building-or place in which
there are reasonable grounds to suspect that any thing liable to forefeiture under the Customs or Excise Acts is kept or concealed, there to search for, seize, and detain or remove any
such thing and, so far as is reasonably necessary for the purpose of such entry, search, seizure, detention or removal, to break open any door, window or container, and to force or
remove any other impediment or obstruction; and further to do and execute all things which of right and according to the Laws and Statutes in force in this behalf shall be to be done.And we further strictly enjoin and command you, and every one of you, that to the said Sir William Dawson Croft, Arlhur Douglas Owen, Charles William Hardisty, Arthur Wood Taylor
and Francis Noel Roberts, Our said Commissioners, and to all and every person or persons who hereafter shall be constituted, appointed and assigned to collect and manage Our
Customs and Excise in and throughout Scotland, and the lslands and Territories thereunto belonging, and to their Deputies, Ministers and Servants, and other Officers, and each of
them, you and every one of you, from time to time be aiding, assisting and helping in the execution of the premises as is meet, and this you and any of you are in nowise to omit at
your perils
This Writ of Assistance is in effect a General Warrant, of the sort which helped to foment the American Revoloution legal power of entry, search and seizure, of anywhere and everywhere in the United Kingdom, and throughout Scotland, which needs no Magistrate or Judge.
The *only* restraint on HMRC is that at night i.e. between 11pm and 5am, andy such raids must be accompanied by a Constable i.e. a Police Officer.
HMRC appears to escape any financial liability for any damage caused by such forced entry or seizure.
Incredibly these Writs of Assistance last for the reign of the Monarch plus another 6 months
These powers surely cannot be compliant with either the Human Rights ACt , or the European Convention on Human Rights, ot the European Charter, all of which
require *proportionality* and a definate time limit (e.g. a month or 6 months etc.) to a warrant etc. before it needs to be reviewed and renewed.
What is so wrong with HMRC having to to apply for a time and specific location limited search warrant under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, like the Police have to ?
FOI Team
Cabinet Office
Room 3.32
1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQ
E-mail: foi-team@cabinetoffice.gov.uk
Sunday 19th July 2015
Dear Sir or Madam,
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the
following information:
-----------------------
With reference to the new Freedom of Information Act Commission
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/freedom-of-information-new-commission
1) What is the financial budget allocated to this Commission, between its announcemnet in July and when it is meant to report in November 2015 ?
2) How much money is the Chair and each member of the FOI Commission to be paid ?
3) Is this an hourly rate or a fixed term contract ?
4) Are travel and subsistance expenses to be paid seperately ?
5) How many hours or days will the Chair and members of the FOI Commission be expected to work between now and November ?
6) Is the Cabinet Office providing office and secretarial support, or is the FOI Commission establishing their own independent secretariat ?
7) What are the public contact details of the FOI Commission, so that members of the public can supply them with evidence of how the Freedom of Information Act works or fails in practice ?
--------------------
Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it
on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.
Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste"
locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.
In the unlikely event that this information is not already
available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the
reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.
If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information
requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an
explanation of any proposed charge.
If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you
should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by
reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.
If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the
Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public
interests you have considered and why you have decided that the
public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the
public interest in releasing the information.
I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as
possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days
from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Monday 10th August 2015.
Yours faithfully,
[name]
[address]
[tailored email address for this FOIA request]
E-mail: foi.request@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk
CC: [previous FOIA response civil servants]
Sunday 19th July 2015
Dear Sir or Madam,
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the
following information:
-----------------------
Copies of the full text of the 80 "Writs of Assistance" which are currently available for use by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern lreland, the under Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 section 161
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/2/section/161
or other equivalent legal powers in force prior to the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, in the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
N.B. This is NOT a request for any sensitive details of any any ongoing investigations.
--------------------
Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it
on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.
Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste"
locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.
In the unlikely event that this information is not already
available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the
reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.
If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information
requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an
explanation of any proposed charge.
If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you
should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by
reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.
If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the
Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public
interests you have considered and why you have decided that the
public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the
public interest in releasing the information.
I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as
possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days
from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Monday 10th August 2015.
Yours faithfully,
[name]
[address]
[tailored email address for this FOIA request]
Writs of Assistance are issued at the commencement of a Monarch's reign; they are not issued on an annual basis HMRC currently has 80 Writs of Assistance for use in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern lreland
The FOIA response:
[name]
Email: [email address]
HM Revenue & Customs
Complaints, FOI & DPA Team
s1177
PO Box 198
Newcastle
NE98 1ZZ
Phone 03000 567151
Fax 03000 577655
Web hmrc.gov.ukEmail [email address]@hmrc gsi.gov.uk
Our ref
Your ref
Date: 9 July 2015FOI nnnn/15
Dear [name]
Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
I refer to your request, which was received on 6 June 2015, for the following information
"1) How many "Writs of Assisfance" has Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (or Customs and Excise) obtained under the Customs and Excise Management Act
1979 section 161http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/2/section/161
or other equivalent legal powers in force prior to the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, in the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth ll. ldeally this figure should be broken down by annual totals since 1979
N.B. This is NOT a request for any sensitive details of any ongoing investigations."
I do apologise for the delay in replying.
I am answering under the terms of the Freedom of lnformation Act 2OOO (FOIA) Writs of Assistance are issued at the commencement of a Monarch's reign; they are not issued on an annual basis HMRC currently has 80 Writs of Assistance for use in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern lreland
lf you are not happy with this reply you may request a review by writing to HMRC FOI Team, Room 1C123, 100 Parliament Street, London SWIA 2BQ or e-mailing foi.review@hmrc.qsi.oov.uk You must request a review within 2 months of the date of this letter. lt would assist our review if you set out which aspects of the reply concern you and why you are dissatisfied.
lf you are not content with the outcome of an internal review, you may apply direcfly to the lnformation Commissioner for a decision. The lnformation Commissioner will not consider a case unless you have exhausted the internal review procedure provided by HMRC. He can be contacted at The lnformation Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 SAF.
Yours sincerely
[name of civil servant]
(by e-mail)
Who wants to know more details about these indeterminate length General Warrants ?
Why are 80 warrants needed ? Are they geographically based e.g. one for each Port or Airport ?
Why are these intrusive powers not independently reviewed e.g. annually ?
How can indeterminate length non-judicial authorisations for intrusive search powers be valid under the Human Rights Acts ?
hsisc
Health & Social Care Information Centre
1 Trevelyan Square
Boar Lane
Leeds
LS1 6AE
Tel: 0300 303 5678
Fax: 0113 254 7239enquiries@hscic.gov.uk
www.hscic.gov.uk18 June 2015
Dear [name]
Our ref: [...]
Thank you for your email received by us on 11th June 2015.
There are two types of information sharing you can object to:
• You can object to information containing data that identifies you from leaving your GP practice. This type of objection will prevent the identifiable information held in your GP record from being sent to the Health and Social Care Information Centre's secure environment. It will also prevent researchers who have gained legal approval from receiving your health information.
• Information from other places where you receive care, such as hospitals and community services is collected nationally by the Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre only releases this information in identifiable form where there is legal approval for doing so such as for medical research.
This legal approval is only granted where it is:
• in the interests of patients or the wider public to do so; and
• impractical to obtain each individual patient's consent; and
• not possible to use anonymised data.If you object, this type of information will not leave the Health and Social Care Information Centre to researchers with approval. The only exceptions are very rare circumstances such as a civil
emergency or a public health emergency.I have checked our records and we have not received any notification from you of a request to prevent the use your information beyond use for direct care. You can find more information about this
here: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/yourinfoI assume, therefore, that you have registered an objection at your GP Practice in response to the
care.data programme.The HSCIC and the care.data programme has entered into a pathfinder stage with four Clinical Commissioning Group areas to test the best ways of supporting GPs to ensure patients are informed of the purposes of this data sharing programme, its safeguards and how they can opt out. See http://www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/tsd/care-data/ for more information on this.
GP systems are not held or maintained by the HSCIC. We can confirm that no data (raw or otherwise) has been collected by, sent to or is directly available to the HSCIC in relation to the care.data and patient objections GP data collections. We can also confirm that no data can be directly accessed from individual GP practice systems by the HSCIC and that no data has been passed to 'regional centres' as part of the care.data programme.
Further information may be available directly from your GP practice.
You may be interested in the recent response from our Caldicott Guardian to the Daily Telegraph which can be found here: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/6348
Yours sincerely,
[name of civil servant]
Higher Information Governance OfficerFurther information about your right to complain under the Data Protection Act is available from the Information
Commissioner's Office, Wilmslow, Cheshire, and on The Information Commissioner's website www.ico.org.uk.
Data Protection Act section 10 Data Subject Notice
]]>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 [...]
To: enquiries@hscic.gov.uk
Subject: Data Protection Act 1998 s10 Data Subject Notice re Care Data opt out scandal - you have 21 days to replyData Controller
Health and Social Care Information Centre,
1 Trevelyan Square,
Boar Lane,
Leeds,
LS1 6AEvia email: enquiries@hscic.gov.uk
Saturday 6th June 2015
Dear Sir or Madam,
This is a Data Subject Notice under the Data Protection Act 1998
section 10, regarding the Care Data opt out scandal reported in the
media e.g.Daily Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11655777/Nearly-1million-patients-could-be-having-confidential-data-shared-against-their-wishes.htmlThe Guardian
NHS details released against patients' wishes, admits data body
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/06/nhs-data-released-against-patients-wishesYour processing and sharing or sale of my Care Data medical
records, despite my explicit opt out, is causing me considerable
distress.Data Protection Act 1998 section 10 Right to prevent processing
likely to cause damage or distress.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/section/10"(3)The data controller must within twenty-one days of receiving a
notice under subsection (1) ('the data subject notice') give the
individual who gave it a written notice-(a) stating that he has complied or intends to comply with the
data subject notice, or(b) stating his reasons for regarding the data subject notice as
to any extent unjustified and the extent (if any) to which he has
complied or intends to comply with it."I am registered with the [...] Medical Centre
http://[...].nhs.uk/
I expect your written reply no later than Monday 29th June 2015 (21
days plus the weekend)yours faithfully
[name]
[address]
How can a Writ of Assistance as used by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, ever have been proportionate
under the European Convention on Human Rights and the UK Human rights Act , when instead of expiring or having to be reviewd after a fixed time period,
e.g. a month or 6 months or a year, these are supposedly valid for the "reign of the monarch" plus another 6 months thereafter.
An indeterminate length of for an extremely privacy intrusive power is almost certain to be deemed illegal by the European Court of Human Rights or the UK Supreme Court.
There is no good investigative reason why such Writs of Assistance cannot be in line with other search or even intercept warrants
and have to be reviewed and renewed after fixed lengths of time e.g. 6 months.
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 section 161 Power to search premises: writ of assistance.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/2/section/161
[F1161 Power to search premises: writ of assistance.
(1) The powers conferred by this section are exercisable by an officer having a writ of assistance if there are reasonable grounds to suspect that anything liable to forfeiture under the customs and excise Acts--
(a) is kept or concealed in any building or place, and
(b) is likely to be removed, destroyed or lost before a search warrant can be obtained and executed.
(2) The powers are--
(a) to enter the building or place at any time, whether by day or night, on any day, and search for, seize, and detain or remove any such thing, and
(b) so far as is necessary for the purpose of such entry, search, seizure, detention or removal, to break open any door, window or container and force and remove any other impediment or obstruction.
(3) An officer shall not exercise the power of entry conferred by this section by night unless accompanied by a constable.
(4) A writ of assistance shall continue in force during the reign in which it is issued and for six months thereafter.]
FOIA request:
]]>HMRC Freedom of Information Team
Room 1C/23 100
Parliament Street
London SW1A 2BQE-mail: foi.request@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk
Saturday 6th June 2015
Dear Sirs
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the
following information:-----------------------
1) How many "Writs of Assistance" has Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (or Customs and Excise) obtained under the
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 section 161
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/2/section/161
or other equivalent legal powers in force prior to the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, in the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Ideally this figure should be broken down by annual totals since 1979
N.B. This is NOT a request for any sensitive details of any any ongoing investigations.
--------------------Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it
on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste"
locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.In the unlikely event that this information is not already
available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the
reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information
requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an
explanation of any proposed charge.If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you
should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by
reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the
Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public
interests you have considered and why you have decided that the
public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the
public interest in releasing the information.I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as
possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days
from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Monday 6th July 2015.Yours faithfully,
[name]
[address]
[tailored email address for this FOIA request]
However, if carte blanche immunity is given to secret informers and agents provocateurs then the most basic principles of justice are abandoned.
If you are a police or intelligence agency or military insider, would you be satisfied that the very limited legal immunity offered on behalf of this QC-led review is sufficient for you to testify in safety, especially where your current or former colleagues have the power to threaten you with criminal charges from their vast array of legal powers, regardless of the wrongs you may be exposing in the public interest ? ,
In this case, the identity of Peter Francis was public, but what if other of his, still anonymous, former undercover police colleagues, wish to speak up about the same or similar allegations of corruption, incompetence and political smear campaigns ?
To really "get at the truth", especially about secretive police / intelligence / military etc. operations, any QC-led or former / currently serving Judge-led or Privy Councillor - led Inquiry or Review. needs to have limited legal immunities for witnesses, made clear from the very outset,
c.f. the previous blog entry
Freedom of Information request - Our ref: FOI/13/14
I am writing in response to the Freedom of information request you submitted to this Office by email dated 14th January, the detail of which is copied below.
1) A full copy of the "limited immunity" undertaking by the Attorney General secured by Mark Ellison QC, who is reviewing police corruption and allegations of police spying on the Steven Lawrence family & campaigners2) Does this "limited immunity" apply only to the Official Secrets Act 1989 or does it cover other potential charges e.g. Terrorism Act 2000 section 58a Eliciting. publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc. ?
3) Does this "limited immunity" apply only to former undercover police officer Peter Francis, or does it cover other potential witnesses or whistleblowers who may wish to communicate with the Ellison review ?
I have now been able to consider your request, It is probably worthwhile to make it clear that this was not an immunity from prosecution. limited or otherwise. The Attorney General provided an undertaking that within certain parameters, evidence given by Peter Francis would not be used against him in any prosecution. The purpose of an Inquiry, public or otherwise, is to get to the truth of what happened. The Attorney General is often asked by the chair of an inquiry to provide an undertaking so that witnesses may be able to give full and frank evidence to the inquiry without fearing that what they say may subsequently be used against them in a prosecution Although the evidence given by an individual cannot be used against them in a prosecution, it does not follow that a prosecution cannot follow The same evidence may be available elsewhere or from some other source, That is why these are undertakings as to the use of evidence and not an immunity from prosecution
I attach the two letters sent from this office to the Ellison Inquiry. Personal contact details of AGO officials have been redacted, You will note that it is limited to Mr Francis and is in respect solely of information about which he had already spoken to the media.
Home Secretary Theresa May's statement announcing that the existing QC-led review by Mark Ellison would now look into the media reports of undercover police surveillance & smears against the Lawrence family and supporters. Undercover Policing - HC Deb, 24 June 2013, c25
This QC-led Review into police corruption around the Lawrence case was announced by Home Secretary Theresa May back in July 2012 - Stephen Lawrence - HC Deb, 11 July 2012, c30WS
With regard to your request under point 2. I would like to note the following. Section 1 of the FOI Act 2000 confers an entitlement. where you have requested recorded information from a public authority, to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in your request, and in cases where the relevant public authority confirms that it holds information, you are entitled to have that information communicated to you.
As point 2 does not appear to be a request for 'recorded information', but rather seeking legal advice, it does not fall under the scope of the Freedom of Information Act
No, this was not "seeking legal advice", it was asking about the scope of the "limited immunity", just like point 3, which is obvious from the text.
The letters clearly state " in any criminal proceedings." which obviously covers point 2 entirely.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request. you have the right to ask for an internal review Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to Rowena Collins Rice. Director General. at the above address.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review. you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision The Information Commissioner can be contacted at' Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House. Water Lane. Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
Guy Flitton
Freedom of Information Officer
letter 1 - Attorney General Office to Mark Ellison QC 21Nov2013 (.pdf):
Attorney General's Office
20 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0NFtel: [redacted]
fax: +44 (020) 7271 2433
www.gov.uk/ago
Mark Ellison QC
The Stephen Lawrence Review
QEB Hoiiis Whiteman.
1 - 2 Laurence Pountney Hill
London
EC4R 0EU21st November 2013
Dear Mr. Ellison
Thank you for your letter of 23rd October concerning the possibility of an undertaking being offered to Peter Francis should he agree to assist your review. Following consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service the Attorney General is prepared to offer Mr Francis an undertaking in the following terms:
This is an undertaking provided to Peter Francis in respect of his provision of evidence to the Stephen Lawrence Review being carried out by Mark Ellison QC. 'Evidence' includes oral evidence, any written statement made by Mr Francis preparatory to giving evidence to the Review or during the course of his testimony to the Review, and any document or information produced to the Review by him.This undertaking applies only to evidence given about matters which are within the terms of reference of the Review and limited to what has been published In the media as to what Mr Francis has said regarding his tasking and reporting connected to the Lawrence campaign.
No evidence Mr Francis may give before the Review, nor any evidence as defined above. will be used against Mr Francis in any criminal proceedings.
The Attorney General is content for you to make public the existence of the undertaking should you wish.
Yours Sincerely
Kevin McGinty
Deputy Legal Secretary
letter 2 - Attorney General Office to Mark Ellison QC 12Dec2013 (.pdf):
Attorney General's Office
20 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0NFtel: [redacted]
fax: +44 (020) 7271 2433
www.gov.uk/ago
Mark Ellison QC
The Stephen Lawrence Review
QEB Hoiiis Whiteman.
1 - 2 Laurence Pountney Hill
London
EC4R 0EU
12 December 2013Dear Mr. Ellison
l understand that the solicitors acting for Mr Francis have sought clarification of the of the Attorney General's undertaking that evidence Mr Francis may provide to the Inquiry will not be used against him in any criminal proceedings. I can confirm that the undertaking will cover any evidence given by him that supplements the issues already published in the media and is within the terms of reference of the Inquiry.
Yours Sincerely
Kevin McGinty
Deputy Legal Secretary
It is significant that Peter Francis' solicitors felt the need to seek further clarification that their client would not face criminal charges if he chose to give evidence to the QC-led Review.
]]>via email to: correspondence@attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk
cc: SLMEQC@qebhw.co.uk
Monday 14th January 2014
Dear Sirs,
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the following information:
1) A full copy of the "limited immunity" undertaking by the Attorney General secured by Mark Ellison QC, who is reviewing police corruption and allegations of police spying on the Stephen Lawrence family & campaigners
2) Does this "limited immunity" apply only to the Official Secrets Act 1989 or does it cover other potential charges e.g. Terrorism Act 2000 section 58a Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc. ?
3) Does this "limited immunity" apply only to former undercover police officer Peter Francis, or does it cover other potential witnesses or whistleblowers who may wish to communicate with the Ellison review ?
Background:
This article in The Guardian newspaper
"Police demand notes from Channel 4 on Lawrence spying whistleblower
Chief constable wants broadcaster to hand over material about revelations that undercover officers spied on Lawrence familyRob Evans
The Guardian, Monday 13 January 2014 21.00 GMT"http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/13/police-channel-4-stephen-lawrence-undercover-spying
which mentions:
"After Creedon's team said they could not give him immunity from an Official Secrets Act prosecution, Francis said he was not happy to speak to their inquiry.
However, Francis is due to give evidence this week to an associated official inquiry that has been asked by the home secretary, Theresa May, to examine the undercover infiltration of the Stephen Lawrence campaign and other allegations.
He is doing so as Mark Ellison, the barrister heading this inquiry, secured from the attorney-general, Dominic Grieve, limited immunity to enable him to speak to his inquiry."
Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.
Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste" locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.
In the unlikely event that this information is not already available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.
If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an explanation of any proposed charge.
If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.
If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public interests you have considered and why you have decided that the public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the public interest in releasing the information.
I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Tuesday 11th February 2014
Yours Sincerely,
[name]
[address]
email: [email]
This constitutes a valid Electronic Signature, as per the
Electronic Communications Act 2000 section 7,
Electronic Signatures and related certificates
Cabinet Office - 6 F Off IA exemptions not to publish Detainee (Torture) Inquiry Interim Report requested back in December 2012..
Whitehall securocrats and politicians are making themselves look unprofessional or inept or corrupt, over the non-publication of the interim report by the Detainee Inquiry, which hardly got going (no witness evidence sessions) before it was abandoned.
How can it take longer to redact and censor what is likely to have been a very bland and content free report, than it actually took to produce in the first place ?
UNCLASSIFIED
Freedom of Information Team
Knowledge and Information Management Unit
Cabinet Office1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQE-mail: foi.team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
Telephone: 020 7276 2294
Web: www.cabinet-office.gov.uk
[name]
[email address]
FOI Reference: FOI318159
18 July 2013Dear [name]
ef: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
I refer to your request of 14 July 2013 re-submitting your previous request of 9 December 2012 where you asked for a copy of:
"The interim report of the Detainee Inquiry sent to the Prime Minister on 27 June 2012, with any necessary redactions clearly marked and with an explanation of which FOIA Exemptions, if any, are being relied on for each redaction."
As you already know, the Cabinet Office holds the requested information. However, the whole of the interim report remains exempt information for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA). Insofar as the requested information is exempt information only by virtue of one or more qualified exemptions, the public interest in maintaining the exemptions outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
For a full explanation of our reasoning in this regard, we refer you to our letter of 8 January 2013, a copy of which is enclosed, for ease of reference. The reasoning set- out in that letter is equally applicable at today's date.
The process of clearing the report for publication has taken longer than envisaged, but it is important for the Government to be able to publish as full an accounting of the Inquiry's work as possible, without compromising national security and consistent with its legal obligations. Discussions with the Inquiry about clearing the report for publication are nearing a conclusion and it is hoped that the Government will be in a position to publish as full a version of their report as possible in the autumn, although no date has been set.
" in the autumn, although no date has been set."
It is now over a year since this report was submitted to the Prime Minister / Cabinet Office.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact the FOI team. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request or wish to request an internal review, you should write to:
Roger Smethurst
Head of Knowledge and Information Management
Cabinet Office
1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQemail: foi.team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
You should note that the Cabinet Office will not normally accept an application for internal review if it is received more than two months after the date that the reply was issued.
If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by Cabinet Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AFYours sincerely
FOI Team
Cabinet Office
It is now over 3 years since Prime Minister David Cameron announced the the setting up of Detainee Inquiry on 6th July 2010
[FCO logo]Information Rights Team
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Old Admiralty Building
London SW1A 2PA[name]
[postal address]17 January 2013
Dear [name]
INTERNAL REVIEW OF FOI REQUEST REF: [ref. no.]
Thank you for your email of 3 January asking for an internal review of the decision conveyed to you in our email dated 31 December 2012.
I am writing to confirm that I have conducted a full examination of how your request was
handled. I apologise for the delay in replying substantively to your initial request of 6th
October 2012.Search for information
My team have spoken to the relevant department which issues the updates of the London
Diplomatic List and the List of Consular Offices outside London.There were no updates made in August and September 2012 due to staff shortages. All the information collected during the period since the July 2012 update was put into the October 2012 update. The lists are working documents and are continually updated. The
department do not keep copies of the updates once these have been published on the
Foreign and Commonwealth Office website.
If there were no updates in August and September due to "staff shortages", then why not say so in October ?
By not being transparent and open , this generated the suspicion that the London Diplomatic List were censored due to the Olympic Games.
I am therefore content that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office does not hold the
documents that you have requested.
Does the FCO really not have any backups of their internal computer systems, on which the various versions of the London Diplomatic List is compiled ?
Are there really no versions of the London Diplomatic List (.pdf) files held in the backups taken of the Protocol Directorate's section on the FCO website, in case of human error or deliberate cyber attack ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/foreign-embassies-in-the-uk
That is very hard to believe.
Your specific queries
I appreciate your feedback, I have reflected on the points that you have made and I accept to a large extent what you have said -your request was a valid one under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and should have been treated as such. If we had dealt with it as an FOI request we would have told you whether or not we held the information and we would have cited any relevant exemptions.I apologise for the provision of the link to the printed document when you were asking about online monthly updates.
Therefore, after careful consideration of the original handling of the request and on the basis of the findings above, this internal review has overturned the original decision and dealt with your request under the Freedom of Information Act.
The email from the Deputy Head of the Information Rights Team back in October 2012 was an Internal Review under Freedom of Information Act of the original rejection, especially as it mentioned FOIA Exemptions that could have been in the original Rejection, but wern't
]]>I hope you are satisfied with the process of this review and the outcome. However, if you feel we have applied the exemptions incorrectly or we have not handled your internal review correctly and you wish to make a complaint, you may then apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF.Yours sincerely,
Barry Proudfoot
Head, Information Rights Team
Information Management Department[Freedom of Information logo]
We keep and use information in line with the Data Protection Act 1998. We may release this personal information to other UK government departments and public authorities.
At least £1.3 million pounds of taxpayers' money has been spent, but not a single word has been published, of even the Interim Report.
Remember the Full report should have been published in July 2011, but the Inquiry has been nobbled.before actually questioning any witnesses.
The Cabinet Office have used no fewer than 6 Exemptions to deny this request under the F Off Information Act 2000:
Cabinet Office
1 Horse Guards Parade
London
SW1A 2HQ
Telephone: 020 7276 2294
Email: FOI.Team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
Web: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk[name]
(by email only)[email address]
8 January 2013
Dear [name]
I refer to your request of 9 December 2012 where you asked for a copy of:
"The interim report` of the Detainee Inquiry sent to the Prime Minister on 27 June 2012, with any necessary redactions clearly marked and with an explanation of which FOIA Exemptions, if any, are being relied on for each redaction."I can confirm that the report is held by the Cabinet Office. However, the whole of the report is exempt information for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Insofar as information in the report is exempt information only by virtue of one or more qualified exemptions, in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining those exemptions outweighs the public interest in disclosure (s.2 FoIA).
Section 22
Most of the report is exempt information by virtue of s.22 FoIA (information intended for future publication): the report is held by the Cabinet Office (and has been held at all times since it was received from the Inquiry) with a view to the publication of as much of it as possible at a future date. This has been made clear by statements made by Mr Kenneth Clarke, on behalf of the Government, to Parliament on 18 January 2012 and 17 July 2012.
section 22 Information intended for future publication.
On 18 January 2012, Mr Clarke said:
"...following consultation with Sir Peter Gibson, the chair of the inquiry, we have decided to bring the work of his inquiry to a conclusion. We have agreed with Sir Peter that the inquiry should provide the Government with a report on its preparatory work to date, highlighting particular themes or issues which might be the subject of further examination` The Government are clear that as much of this report as possible will be made public, We will continue to keep Parliament fully informed of progress..."(emphasis added)
On 17 July 2012, Mr Clarke said (in a written statement to Parliament):
"In my Statement on 18 January 2012, announcing the Government's decision to bring the Detainee inquiry to a conclusion, I said that Sir Peter Gibson, the inquiry chair, had agreed to provide the Government with a report on its preparatory work to date, highlighting particular themes or issues which might be the subject of further examination. The inquiry sent its report to the Prime Minister on 27 June 2012. The Government are now looking carefully at its contents and remain committed to publishing as much of this interim report as possible. I will provide a further update when the House returns."(emphasis added)
Public interest test
The exemption under s.22 is a qualified exemption. We have considered the arguments in favour of release alongside those in favour of withholding information. It is our view, that whilst there is a public interest in publishing the report now, on grounds of transparency and openness, there is a stronger public interest in ensuring sufficient time and space: to identify the material in the report that can properly be made publicly available; and to distinguish this from material disclosure of which would not be in the public interest (which material is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the exemptions considered below).
Accordingly, where the s.22 exemption applies, the public interest balance falls in favour of withholding the material.
We continue to look carefully at the content of the report in order to fulfil the Government's intention to publish as much of it as possible. At present, there is no date set for publication.
Absolute exemptions
Of the remainder of the information in the report, some is exempt information by virtue of absolute exemptions. The Cabinet Office is not required to consider whether the public interest favours disclosure of information to which these exemptions apply.
Material in the report which relates to, or was supplied indirectly by, a body listed in s.23(3) is exempt information, by virtue of s.23(1),
section 23 Information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security matters.
Certain information in the report comprises personal data, disclosure of which would contravene the Data Protection Act 1998 (in particular it would contravene the First Data Protection Principle, in that disclosure would not be fair to the individuals concerned). Accordingly, this information is exempt information by virtue of s.40 FoIA.
section 40 Personal information.
Certain information in the report is confidential information, disclosure of which would constitute an actionable breach of confidence on the part of the Cabinet Office. I can not provide further details in this regard because to do so would disclose exempt information (see s.17(4) FoIA). This information is exempt information by virtue of s.41 FoIA.
section 17 Refusal of request.
section 41 Information provided in confidence.
Other qualified exemptions
The rest of the information in the report is exempt information on the grounds of (one or more of) s.24(1), s.27(1), s.42 and/or further exemptionsI details of which can not be provided without disclosing exempt information (see s.17(4) FOIA).
section 27 International relations.
section 42 Legal professional privilege.
Some material in the report, which is not exempt information by virtue of s.23(1), is exempt information under s.24(1), because exemption from disclosure is required in order to safeguard national security. This is a qualified exemption. Safeguarding national security is a fundamental obligation of government and the public interest in its maintenance may only be overridden in exceptional circumstances.
Some material in the report is exempt information by virtue of s.27(1), because its disclosure would be likely to prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and another state, or the interests of the United Kingdom abroad: its disclosure would make international relations more difficult for the UK and/or would require us to take diplomatic steps to minimise the resulting harm. This, too, is a qualified exemption. Since disclosure of this material would be likely to inhibit other governments' willingness to share sensitive information with the UK there is a strong public interest in maintaining this exemption.
Some information in the report is exempt from disclosure under s.42 of because it is information for which a claim to legal professional privilege (LPP) could be maintained in legal proceedings. LPP stems from the strong public interest in the proper administration of justice. Accordingly there is a strong public interest in-built to the privilege itself. While this too is a qualified exemption, strong countervailing considerations must be adduced to override the in-built public interest.
Public interest test
While there is a strong public interest in openness and transparency with regard to the matters that are the subject of the Detainee lnquiry's terms of reference, this public interest will be very largely met by the publication, in due course, of as much of the lnquiry's report as possible. In these circumstances, there is only limited public interest in favour of disclosure of the information in the report to which the above exemptions apply; and the public interest in maintaining the exemptions comfortably outweighs this limited public interest in disclosure,
if you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request or wish to request an internal review, you should write to:
Roger Smethurst
Head of Knowledge and Information Management Unit
Cabinet Office
1 Horse Guards Road
LONDON
SW1A 2HQEmail: FOI.Team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
You should note that the Cabinet Office will not normally accept an application for internal review if it is received more than two months after the date that the reply was issued,
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by the Cabinet Office. The information Commissioner can be contacted at:The Information Commissioner`s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AFlf you have any queries about this letter, please Contact the Cabinet Office FOI Team. Please remember to quote the reference number FOl[reference number] in any future communicationsI
Yours sincerely,
FOI Team Cabinet Office
[signature]
FOIA: House of Commons - Commons Select Committee Reports - numbers & sales of printed paper copies
has been answered with a Substantive Reply, within the Statutory 20 working day limit, together with accompanying Excel spreadsheets.
We wish the FOIA staff at the House of Commons a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year !
From: FOICOMMONS@parliament.uk
To: [email address]
Subject: [FOIA reference] responseDate: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:14:44 +0000
Dear [name]Thank you for your request for information which is copied below.
The information in this answer relates only to House of Commons Select Committee reports and does not include Joint Committee reports, which are normally printed by the House of Lords. The House of Lords is a separate public authority and can be contacted by email: foilords@parliament.uk.
All House of Commons Select Committee reports are published on the web in HTML and PDF -- http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/. These may be read and downloaded without charge and contain links to pricing information for printed copies.
The majority of printing of Select Committee reports is carried out by the printing and publishing contractor for the House of Commons, The Stationery Office (TSO). The information given in the annexes is for Select Committee reports for the 2010-12 Session which were printed in financial year 2011/12. Some printing is also carried out by the House's internal print unit, for example, to supplement stocks; these copies are not sold to the public. Information is not held on printing of Select Committee reports carried out on office printers.
Data in annex A shows the approximate number of paper copies of Select Committee reports printed by TSO, broken down by HC number, subject matter and ISBN -- the data set does not contain full titles.
Data in annex B shows the number of paper copies of Select Committee reports printed by the House's internal print unit, broken down by HC number -- the data set does not contain titles.
The Houses of Parliament Shop (formerly the Parliamentary Bookshop) sells some paper copies of Select Committee reports to the public. Data in annex C shows the number of paper copies of Select Committee reports sold by the Shop, broken down by HC number, ISBN and sales -- the data set does not contain titles.
The House of Commons does not hold information on the number of sales of Select Committee reports by TSO or the money raised from those sales.
You may, if dissatisfied with the handling of your request, ask the House of Commons to conduct an internal review of any decision regarding your request. Requests for internal review should be addressed to: Freedom of Information Officer, Department of HR and Change, House of Commons London SW1 0AA or foicommons@parliament.uk. Please ensure that you specify the full reasons for the internal review and any arguments or points that you wish to make.
If you remain dissatisfied, you may appeal to the Information Commissioner at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF, www.ico.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely
[name of official] Freedom of Information Coordinator Information Rights and Information Security (IRIS) Service House of Commons
Download the Excel Spreadsheets (.xlsx)
The figures confirm what we had supected, that very few people actually read the printed copies of House of Commons Select Committee Reports:
This strengthens our contention that the Internet (web pages and email) should now be the
The House of Commons (and the Lords) should desist from their technologocially stupid practice of pretending that the "official" publication of a Select Committee Report has to be "embargoed" and wait for the printed version to become available.
In order to send a copy to the the printers, there will already be an electronic version of the test of the report which will have been "briefed" to mainstream media journalists, or leaked.
Since the mainstream media does not seem to honour these voluntary "embargos" anyway, then Parliament should publish Select Committee Reports online on the worldwide web first on say a Wednesday, in time for analysis and comment by the weekend newspapers, with the small number of printed copies to follow as required the week after.
Perhaps a few more Members of Parliament might actually then read the detail of such reports than appear to do so at present.
]]>FOI Team
Cabinet Office
Room 3.32
1 Horse Guards Road
London
SW1A 2HQE-mail: foi.team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk
Sunday 9th December 2012
Dear Sirs
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the
following information:-----------------------
With reference to17 July 2012 : Column 132WS
Detainee Inquiry
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Kenneth Clarke): In my statement on 18 January 2012, Official Report, column 751,announcing the Government's decision to bring the detainee inquiry to a conclusion, I said that Sir Peter Gibson, the inquiry chair, had agreed to provide the Government with a report on its preparatory work to date, highlighting particular themes or issues which might be the subject of further examination. The inquiry sent its report to the Prime Minister on 27 June 2012. The Government are now looking carefully at its contents and remain committed to publishing as much of this interim report as possible. I will provide a further update when the House returns.
Please disclose:
1) The interim report of the Detainee Inquiry sent to the Prime Minister on 27 June 2012, with any necessary redactions clearly marked and with an explanation of which FOIA Exemptions, if any, are being relied on for each redaction.
---------------------Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it
on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste"
locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.In the unlikely event that this information is not already
available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the
reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information
requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an
explanation of any proposed charge.If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you
should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by
reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the
Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public
interests you have considered and why you have decided that the
public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the
public interest in releasing the information.I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as
possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days
from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Thursday 10th January 2013 (allowing for public holidays).Yours Sincerely,
[name]
[address]
[tailored email address for this FOIA request]
Freedom of Information Officer,
the House of Commons,
Department of HR and Change,
7 Millbank,
London,
SW1P 3JA
E-mail: foicommons@parliament.uk
Sunday 9th December 2012
Dear Sirs
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please disclose the
following information:
-----------------------
With reference to the Commons Select Committees Reports, for the
last calendar or financial year (whichever is most convenient)
Please disclose:
1) The approximate total number of paper copies of the Select
Committee reports actually printed.
2) The approximate number of paper copies of the Select Committee
reports actually printed, broken down by Title.
3) The approximate total number of paper copies of the Select
Committee reports actually sold to the public and / or the
approximate total amount of money so raised.
4) The approximate number of paper copies of the Select Committee
reports actually sold to the public and / or the approximate total
amount of money so raised, broken down by Title.
---------------------
Please provide the requested information, ideally by publishing it
on your public world wide website, or alternatively by email.
Ideally this should *not* be in the form of a "copy and paste"
locked Adobe .pdf file, or similar, attachment.
In the unlikely event that this information is not already
available in a standard electronic format, then please explain the
reasons why, when you provide the information in another format.
If you are proposing to make a charge for providing the information
requested, please provide full details in advance, together with an
explanation of any proposed charge.
If you decide to withhold any of the information requested, you
should clearly explain why you have done so in your response, by
reference to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 legislation.
If your decision to withhold is based upon an evaluation of the
Public Interest, then you should clearly explain which public
interests you have considered and why you have decided that the
public interest in maintaining the exception(s) outweighs the
public interest in releasing the information.
I look forward to receiving the information requested as soon as
possible and in any event, within the statutory 20 working days
from receipt of this email i.e. no later than Thursday 10th January
2013 (allowing for public holidays).
Yours Sincerely,
[name]
[address]
[tailored specific email address]