FOI case law update - 28 November 2013

The Campaign for Freedom of Information's next course on 'Information Commissioner & Tribunal Decisions - what do they mean in practice?' is taking place in London on 28th November 2013.

This course, now in its 8th year, aims to help experienced FOI practitioners and others with a good working knowledge of the FOI Act keep abreast of new developments in FOI case law. Its exact content is dependent on the decisions that have been issued during the previous six months, but typically covers issues such as: "fair" and "unfair" disclosures of personal data; the FOI/EIR borderline; the application of specific exemptions including those for breach of confidence, commercial interests and legal professional privilege; where the public interest line is being drawn; vexatious requests; and the cost limit, aggregating requests, advice & assistance and other administrative provisions.

The course is presented by Maurice Frankel, the Campaign's director, who has worked in the field for 29 years.

Further details here.

76 organisations call on government to drop proposed FOI restrictions

76 campaign groups, charities and press bodies have written to the prime minister urging him to drop proposals to restrict the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. They say the proposals are not compatible with the prime minister's stated aim of making the UK "the most open and transparent government in the world".

The letter coincides with an international summit on open government, hosted by the UK in London tomorrow (October 31). The event will be attended by government and civil society representatives from over 60 countries. Each government - including the UK - is expected to announce new commitments towards greater openness, drawn up in partnership with non-governmental organisations from their own countries.

However, in November 2012 the UK government announced that it was considering a series of proposals to make it easier for public authorities to refuse FOI requests on cost grounds. These proposals are still being considered.

The organisations say: "We find it difficult to reconcile the ambition that the UK should be the world leader in openness with the government's proposals to restrict the FOI Act, which is a critical element of the UK's openness arrangements. Many requests of substantial public interest would be refused under these proposals regardless of the benefits of disclosure. We hope that the government will mark that commitment by announcing that it will not be bringing forward proposals to restrict the Act."

The joint letter, which has been co-ordinated by the Campaign for Freedom of Information, has also been signed by: Action against Medical Accidents, Action on Hearing Loss, Against Violence & Abuse, Animal Aid, Article 19, Big Brother Watch, British Humanist Association, British Institute of Human Rights, British Muslims for Secular Democracy, Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union, Broken Rainbow UK, BUAV, Campaign Against Arms Trade, Campaign for Better Transport, Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom, Children are unbeatable! Alliance, Compact Voice, Corporate Responsibility Coalition, Corporate Watch, Crucible Centre for Human Rights Research, Daily Mail, Democratic Society, Equanomics-UK, Friends of the Earth, Friends Families and Travellers Community Base, Full Fact, Gender Identity Research and Education Society, Guardian News & Media, Heather Brooke, Inclusion London, Indigenous Peoples Links, Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust, International Records Management Trust, Involve, Jubilee Debt Campaign, JUST West Yorkshire, Law Centres Network, Law Society Gazette, League Against Cruel Sports, Leigh Day, Liberty, London Evening Standard Independent & Independent on Sunday, London Mining Network, Migrants' Rights Network, Mind, MySociety, National Secular Society, National Union of Journalists, Newspaper Society, OneKind, Open Democracy, Open Knowledge Foundation, Open Rights Group, OpenCorporates, People & Planet, Practical Participation, Press Gazette, Prisoners' Advice Service, Public Concern at Work, Public Interest Investigations, Public Interest Research Centre, Publish What You Fund, Race on the Agenda, Refugee Council, Republic, Request Initiative, Rights Watch (UK), RoadPeace, Save FOI, Society of Editors, Spinwatch, Taxpayers' Alliance, The Press in York, Transform Justice, Unlock Democracy and Women's Resource Centre.

Full press release here.

MPs call for extension of the FOI Act to cover contracted out public services

An Early Day Motion calling for the extension of the FOI Act to cover contracted out public services has been tabled by Labour MP Grahame Morris and co-sponsored by Caroline Lucas (Green), Mark Durkan (SDLP), John McDonnell (Lab), Margaret Ritchie (SDLP) and Peter Bottomley (Con):

That this House praises the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the transparency and openness it has brought to the public sector and the public right of access of information held by central and local government and its agencies; notes that public services delivered by private companies are currently beyond the scope of the 2000 Act; further notes that, as growing amounts of public services are privatised, ever decreasing amounts of public spend are subject to freedom of information; and supports calls to extend the legislation so that public services contracted out to the private and third sector are covered by freedom of information legislation.

The contracting out of public authority functions to bodies which are not subject to the FOI Act is likely to severely undermine the public’s rights to information. For further information, see the Campaign's evidence to the Justice Committee's review of the Act last year (pg 15-19).

The motion is open for other MPs to sign. Please write to your MP and ask them to sign EDM 613 on 'Extension of Freedom of Information Act 2000'.  You can check the list of MPs that have signed here.

Practical training on using the FOI Act

Wednesday 2nd October 2013

Human Rights Action Centre 17-25 New Inn Street London EC2A 3EA 

Do you want to learn how to use the Freedom of Information Act? Are you already using the Act, but want to know more about how key provisions are being interpreted?

Making a FOI request is straightforward but making an effective request can be more difficult. Requests which ask for too much information can be refused - and some information may be exempt. But a well thought-out request can have a powerful impact, revealing that a policy isn’t working or an authority isn’t doing its job or generating key information you need for your research.

This course is designed to help campaigners, journalists and others make the most of the Act and the parallel Environmental Information Regulations. It explains the legislation, shows how to draft clear and effective requests, describes how to challenge unjustified refusals and highlights critical decisions of the Information Commissioner and Tribunal. The course’s interactive sessions will encourage you to work out how to best apply the Act in a variety of situations. This one day course is aimed at both beginners and people who want to use FOI more effectively.

You can register online here or download a booking form here.

Private member's bill would identify FOI requesters

The identity of people making FOI requests would be made public if a new private member's bill succeeds. The Freedom of Information (Identity of Applicants) Bill, which will have serious implications for the privacy of individual requesters, is being introduced by Karl McCartney, the Conservative MP for Lincoln, who came 8th in the ballot for bills. 

The bill was due to have its first reading in the House of Commons today (19 June 2013), but Mr McCartney was not present. An article by the Campaign for Freedom of Information discusses its implications:

Once requests have been answered, there may be no objection to identifying the requesting organisations such as media bodies, campaign groups, professional bodies or companies.

Identifying individual requesters is a different matter. Many people use the FOI Act to obtain information about matters which directly affect them. The information they seek may not be personal, but their interest in it is. Someone who asks a social services department about the support provided to people with a particular condition living in particular circumstances may be describing their own situation. Publishing their names will suggest this to others. Where the inference is correct, the disclosure would be highly intrusive. As the law stands, it would also breach the Data Protection Act (DPA). There should be no question of identifying requesters seeking information about issues they face such as mental illness, child abuse, domestic violence, sexual orientation or learning disability.

Someone who believes they have been wrongly suspected of committing an offence may seek information from the police about the incident. Publishing their names may publicly identify them as a suspect.

A request may be prompted by suspicion that an authority or other body has behaved improperly. Naming the requester may reveal them as a potential whistleblower, exposing them to possible reprisals.

When someone asks for information about the spending, conduct or truthfulness of a minister or council leader, the first thing the politician may want to know is who is asking. If that person is an employee or someone dependent on the authority for a service, naming them may leave them vulnerable. Some FOI officers refuse to circulate the requester's name to others within their organisation, partly for these reasons.

The FOI Act is meant to be 'applicant blind'. Authorities are required to consider whether information can be made public - not whether information should be released to the person making the request. So the identity of the requester is normally irrelevant to the disclosure decision (though an exception may be made for potentially vexatious requests). The applicant blind principle ensures that authorities are not tempted to disclose information to those who are sympathetic to them, while placing obstacles in the way of critics.

Full article here.

FOI case law update - 5 June 2013

The Campaign for Freedom of Information's next course on 'Information Commissioner & Tribunal Decisions' will be in London on 5 June 2013.

This course, now in its 8th year, deals only with significant Commissioner and Tribunal decisions issued during the past six months. It aims to help experienced FOI practitioners and others with a good working knowledge of the FOI Act keep abreast of new developments. Its exact content is dependent on the decisions that have been issued during the period, but typically covers issues such as:

• "fair" and "unfair" disclosures of personal data; 
• the FOI/EIR borderline; 
• the application of specific exemptions including those for breach of confidence, commercial interests and legal professional privilege; 
• where the public interest line is being drawn; and
• the cost limit, aggregating requests, invalid requests, advice & assistance and other administrative provisions. 

The course will be presented by Maurice Frankel, the Campaign's director, who has worked in the field for 29 years.

Significant discounts are available for more than one booking from the same organisation.

Further details here.

Using the FOI Act! Training for requesters, 23 April 2013

Do you want to learn how to use the Freedom of Information Act? Are you already using the Act, but want to know more about how the Information Commissioner and Tribunal are interpreting key provisions?

While making a FOI request is straightforward, making an effective request is more difficult. The Campaign's practical course is designed to help requesters make effective use of the legislation. The morning session provides a working guide to the legislation, covering both the Freedom of Information Act and parallel Environmental Information Regulations, and includes an interactive section on drafting requests. The afternoon session is more advanced and covers some of the key decisions made under both regimes and explains their implications for you. We think most requesters will benefit from attending the whole day, although you're free to attend only one of the sessions if you wish.

Further information and a booking form are available from the Campaign's website.