3/J1
Eland House
Bressenden Place
London SW1E 5DU / Tel 0303 444 2641
Fax 0303 444 3799
25 October 2010
E OllierVia Email: / Our Ref:F0004040
Your Ref:
Dear E Ollier,
I am writing in response to your request of 26 August 2010 for information about the abolition of the Audit Commission. This Department does hold some of the information you are seeking and we are dealing with your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
I can confirm that Communities and Local Government does hold some of the information that you have requested. Annex A lists the documents that are being provided at this time.
The FOI Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and in any event no later than 20 working days after receiving your request. However, when a qualified exemption applies to the information and the public interest test needs to be considered, we are permitted to extend the time for response by a reasonable period. We do, of course, aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including in cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies in respect of a request for exempt information. Your request, however, raises complex public interest considerations for some of the information which must be analysed before we can come to a decision on releasing the information.
As per our letter of 24th September, we considered specific qualified exemptionsin relation to your request. These were sections 22, 35(1)(a) and 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. We need to extend our response time by 20 working days, to 22nd November, to give us time to assess further documents under these exemptions as to whether the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it
The documents I am able to provide you at this time are listed in Annex A. I wish to advise you however that some of the information included in these documents is exempt from the right of access under the FOI Act by reason of sections 35(1)(a), 35(1)(b), 35(1)(d), 36(2)(c), and 43(2). The full text of sections 35, 36 and 43 is attached in Annex B to this letter.
Section 35(1)(a) provides that:
(1) Information held by a government department or by the Welsh Assembly Government is exempt information if it relates to—
(a) the formulation or development of government policy,
For the text in documents 6 (at points B, E, G, I and J),7 (at points C and D), 8 (at point G), 9 (at point H) and 12 (at points F and I), we considered that there is a public interest in policy making being open, leading to increased trust and engagement between citizens and government. The decision to disband the Audit Commission is obviously a matter of public importance and public debate as to the options is valuable. However, we are still developing the Government policy on the issues this text relates to and we believe there is a legitimate public interest in not releasing information on points of policy which have not yet been decided. Releasing information which is incomplete or which is misleading could adversely affect the development of the final policy. Overall, we consider that the public interest in ensuring that policy can be formulated effectively outweighs the public interest in disclosing the details redacted.
Section 35(1)(b) provides that:
(1) Information held by a government department or by the Welsh Assembly Government is exempt information if it relates to—
(b) Ministerial communications,
For the redacted text in documents 2 (at point C, D and F), 4 (at point B) 9 (at point A), 10 (at point B and C) and 11 (at points C and G) we considered that there is a public interest in policy making being open, leading to increased trust and engagement between citizens and government. The decision to disband the Audit Commission is obviously a matter of public importance and public debate as to the options is valuable.
However, the overall Government intention to disband the Audit Commission has been made public, and the redacted information relates to discussions in Cabinet about this decision. Some of this text also relates to discussions in Cabinet, or with Ministers regarding the different options for moving forward. While we acknowledge the considerable public interest in knowing this information, maintaining the convention of collective responsibility is fundamental to the continued effectiveness of Cabinet government, as Ministers should be able to discuss the different options and their pros and cons in private, but maintain a united front once the final decision is made. Revealing the information could encourage the exploitation of differences of opinion for political or personal purposes and result in greater constraints on Ministers in putting forward their views, to the detriment of properly discussed and informed decision-making. On balance, we consider that the public interest in maintaining the convention of collective responsibility outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the information redacted.
We are also not releasing any ministerial correspondence, or emails which set out particular Ministers’ views, which falls under your request as we believe it is also exempt under s35(1)(b) for the same reasons as above.
Section 35(1)(d) provides that:
(1) Information held by a government department or by the Welsh Assembly Government is exempt information if it relates to—
(d) the operation of any Ministerial private office.
For the redacted text in documents 3 (at point E) and 13 (at point D), we considered the public interest in ensuring the Private Offices operate efficiently. However, the Private Office is an important aspect of the space around Ministers which needs to be protected so that good decision making is not threatened.
Section 36(2)(c) provides that:
(2) Information to which this sections is applies is exempt information if, in the reasonable opinion of a qualified person, disclosure of the information under this Act –
(c) would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely otherwise to prejudice, the effective conduct of public affairs.
The text in documents 2 (at point C), 5, 6 (at point C, D, F, H and K), 7 (at point A and B), 8 (at points A – F and H and I), 9 (at points B – D and F and G) and 10 (at points D – G) concerns the advice or views of Ministers and officials on policy that has yet to be decided. While it was announced that the Government intends to disband the Audit Commission, the detailed policy on how this will be achieved and what the new framework for local audit will look like, are still be worked up. The qualified person in this instance was a Minister in the Department, who took the view that the exemption was engaged.
We considered that open policy making may lead to increased trust and engagement between citizens and Government and can result in better policy formation. However, Ministers and officials need space in which to develop their thinking and explore options in communications and discussion with other Ministers and officials. We also considered that the premature disclosure of policy thinking may end up closing off better options because of adverse public reaction. On balance, we took the view that this information regarding possible future policy was not in the public interest
Section 43(2) provides that
(2) Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it).
For the text in document 6 (at point A) is covered by this exemption, there is a public interest in the disclosure of commercial information to ensure that there is transparency in the accountability of public funds, and that departments’ commercial activities are conducted in an open and honest way. However, as we intend to put the Audit Commission’s audit practice into private ownership, there is a legitimate public interest in preserving the value of this asset. Releasing incomplete, or unverified financial information would be detrimental at this stage, and releasing information about what price the department might expect would adversely affect its bargaining power during negotiations for the transfer of ownership. Overall, we consider that the public interest in preserving the value of the Audit Commission audit practice outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the figures redacted.
Communities and Local Government as an organisation aims to be as helpful as possible in the way it deals with requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. If, however, you are not satisfied with the way in which your request has been handled or the outcome, you may request an internal review within two calendar months of the date of this letter. Information about the Department's review procedures and how to apply for an internal review of your case is on the Department's website at:
This also explains your right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision in the event that you remain dissatisfied following the Department’s review.
Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted this Department’s Internal Review procedure. The Information Commissioner‘s address and contact details are set out in the above leaflet.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
Yours sincerely
Holly Manktelow
Annex A
Document / Summary / Exemptions1 / Email between officials regarding Trade Unions / Officials names under senior civil service have been removed
2 / Email between officials regarding audit reform / A, B – names removed
C – s36(2)(c)
3 / Advice to Secretary of State regarding the Future of Local Audit / A, B – names removed
C, D and F – s35(1)(b)
E – s35(1)(d)
4 / Advice to Secretary of State regarding future of local audit / A and C – names removed
B – s35(1)(b)
5 / Note on Mutualisation / s36(2)(c)
6 / Paper on HMT queries / A – s43(2)
B, E, G, I, J – s35(1)(a)
C, D, F, H, K – s35(2)(c)
7 / Advice to Secretary of State regarding future of Audit Commission / A, B – s36(2)(c)
C, D – S35(1)(a)
8 / Note on the future of local audit / A – F, H, I – s36(2)(c)
G – s35(1)(a)
9 / Note on the future of local audit / A – s35(1)(b)
B – D, F, G – (s36(2)(c)
H – s35(1)(a)
10 / Email between officials in DCLG and HMT / A, H – names removed
B, C – s35(1)(b)
D – F, G – s36(2)(c)
11 / Email stream between officials on the Audit Commission / A, B, D, E, F, H, I – names removed
C, G – s35(1)(b)
12 / Advice to Secretary of State on the Audit Commission / A – E, G, H – s35(1)(b)
F, I – s35(1)(a)
J, K – names removed
13 / Email between officials on pension liabilities / A, B, C – names removed
D – s35(1)(d)
14 / Email between officials regarding the Audit Commission’s statutory responsibilities / Officials names removed if below SCS
15 / Email between officials – appointments to AC board / Officials names removed if below SCS
16 / Briefing for Secretary of State for an interview with Daily Telegraph / None
17 / Proposed timeline for the Secretary of State for the announcement to disband the Audit Commission / None
18 / Letter from SoS to Clive Betts MP sent on 13th August on the announcement / None
19 / Letter from SoS to John Denham MP sent on 13th August on the announcement / None
20 / A Question and Answer brief / None
21 / Letter from SoS to Margaret Hodge sent on 13th August on the announcement / None
22 / Supplementary Q & A briefing / None
23 / Letter from SoS to Margaret Hodge on 8th September regarding an urgent question in the House of Commons / None
24 / Letter from SoS to Dame Margaret Eaton on 13th August on the announcement / None
25 / Supplementary Q&A briefing / None
26 / Press Notice on announcement / None
27 / Letter from SoS to Michael O’ Higgins on 13th August 2010 on the announcement / None