London Borough of Camden s1

London Borough of Camden

Access to Information Team

Address: Judd Street

Legal Services

Room 219

London.

WC1H 9JE

e-mail:

Direct: 020 7974 7857

www.camden.gov.uk

Date: 25th February 2014

To: S Noble

Dear S Noble

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on 3nd February 2014.

You requested information on the following:

Approximately six months ago, I made a request to Camden Council regarding RadFem 2013. (This can be found on WhatDoTheyKnow.com at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/radfem_2013) I noted in my reply that, following a third-party annotation on WhatDoTheyKnow, I was not convinced that the council released a full set of information.

In particular, the only documents released seem to be correspondence between the organisers of the event and the council, and no internal correspondence or documentation was released.

Given the time elapsed since the previous request, I am making another request, hopefully with greater clarity of language, for *all* information that the council holds regarding the RadFem 2013 conference that was not released under the original request.

For the avoidance of doubt, this includes minutes of any meetings that any councillors, or any people employed by or acting on behalf of the council, have attended regarding the conference, and any correspondence under the same criteria.

We responded to you three times on this issue, on the on the 14th June, 17th June, and the 11th July. We disclosed and attached all the documentation we held on the matter. Since that date no new information has arisen.

The three letters are attached to this e mail with the original documentation.

Please note the information is still covered by copyright legislation. You are not authorised to re-use this information for commercial or research purposes as defined by the Re-Use of Public Sector Regulations 2005. If you do wish to re-use this information please contact the Access to Information Team, Legal Services, Room 219, Camden Town Hall, and London, WC1H 9LP, who will assess your request.

You have the right of appeal against the decision. If you wish to appeal please set out in writing your grounds of appeal (within 2 months of this letter) and send it to: Freedom of Information Appeals Panel, Central Complaints Unit, Camden Town Hall, Judd Street, London WC1H 9JE and your complaint will be dealt with through our Internal Review procedure.

If you are still not satisfied following the Internal Review, you have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office. They can be contacted at: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, and Cheshire. SK9 5AF.
Telephone: 01625 545 700
www.ico.gov.uk

Yours sincerely

Caroline Jenkinson

Head of Arts and Tourism

Culture and Environment Directorate

Date: 14th June 2013

To: S Noble

Dear S Noble

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on 31st May 2013. Your request has now been considered and the information requested is enclosed.

You requested information on the following:

I am requesting any documentation, suitably redacted to conform with the Data Protection Act, regarding the booking of the RadFem 2013 conference to take place at the Camden Centre on Saturday 8th June 2013 and Sunday 9th June 2013. This includes any correspondence between the organizers of the conference and the council, and any internal documentation that led to the decision to grant the booking. Of particular interest would be the equality impact assessment undertaken during the booking process.

Related papers are attached to this response.

All names and contact details have been redacted under section 40 of the Freedom of information guidance.

We have withheld some information under section 41, information provided in confidence, and under section 42, legal professional privilege.

We are in discussion with a third party concerning additional documents, and will come back to you with that decision.

Yours sincerely

Caroline Jenkinson

Head of Arts and Tourism

Culture and Environment Directorate

Date: 17th June 2013

To: S Noble

Dear S Noble

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on 31st May 2013. Your request has now been considered and the information requested is enclosed.

You requested information on the following:

Related papers are attached to this response.

All names and contact details have been redacted under section 40 of the Freedom of information guidance.

We have withheld some information under section 41, information provided in confidence, and under section 42, legal professional privilege.

We are in discussion with a third party concerning additional documents, and will come back to you with that decision.

Yours sincerely

Caroline Jenkinson

Head of Arts and Tourism

Culture and Environment Directorate

Date: 11th July 2013

To: S Noble

Dear S Noble

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on 31st May 2013.

You requested information on the following:

We responded on the 17th June to this request.

There was one outstanding document we were seeking permission to disclose from a third party.

We have now received their response and their legal representatives are asking us not to disclose the material, quoting section 41 and section 42 of the FOI guidance.

Yours sincerely

Caroline Jenkinson

Head of Arts and Tourism

Culture and Environment Directorate

E mails 1:

From: Kat Pinder [mailto:
Sent: 12 May 2013 15:38
To: Ezer, Nicky
Cc: Vita Snowden;
Subject: Statement, security plan, minutes

Hi Nicky,
Here is our response to the points you asked us to address via email:
We'd like to reconfirm that Radfem 2013 is open to, and inclusive of, all females who are radical feminists or who are genuinely interested in learning more about radical feminism. We have never defined or qualified what we mean by "women-only" in our publicity and will continue not to do so.
In relation to the police request, Vita has spoken to Sarah Fairhurst (community police events officer) and explained that, in our experience, particularly as the new venue has already been named in the press, access to conference information via a password to our website is likely to be inflammatory, as opposed to calming things down. Our opponents are likely to believe we're trying to hide something. They are likely to attempt to discover and "expose" it, which will probably cause more problems for us and, potentially, the council, than this would solve. Sarah understood the point and we are united in our desire to calm things down and not inflame the situation. She was ok with the reasons why we tend not to want to go along with this advice in this instance. We always have, and intend to continue to, work closely with the police to put on a peaceful, successful conference.
We attach the revised security plan. You have more experience with dealing with these matters than us so please advise us if you feel it can be improved. Minutes from the meeting, are also attached, with the actions that we agreed at the meeting.

We look forward to recieving the contract early in the week. Please let us know if you need anything else from us.
Many thanks
Kat

From: Jenkinson, Caroline
Sent: 08 May 2013 13:28
To: Ezer, Nicky
Subject: RE: Radfem

Thanks Nicky

Caroline Jenkinson
Head of Arts and Tourism
Telephone: 020 7974 1685

From: Ezer, Nicky
Sent: 08 May 2013 13:22
To: Jenkinson, Caroline
Subject: Radfem

I have spoken to Kat and confirmed that there can be no exclusivity on marketing – and detailed the born women issue

She says there is no mention of this and the Conference is for Women only, but the building does not exclude men – as I have insisted that men will enter our building and in fact be part of our working teams – security and technical.

I am seeing her on Friday at 8.30am at the office.

Nicky

Nicky Ezer
Manager Events Service and Camden Centre
Culture and Sport
Culture and Environment
London Borough of Camden
Telephone:020 7974 1932 / 5633
Mobile:07767647421
Fax:0207 974 6433
Web:camden.gov.uk

The Camden Centre
Bidborough Street
London WC1H 9AU
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: Jenkinson, Caroline
Sent: 02 May 2013 18:46
To: Maughan, Andrew; Dean, Fiona
Subject: RE: RADFEM

Thanks Andrew

Caroline Jenkinson
Head of Arts and Tourism
Telephone: 020 7974 1685

From: Maughan, Andrew
Sent: 02 May 2013 18:12
To: Dean, Fiona; Jenkinson, Caroline
Subject: RADFEM

Fiona/Caroline

I think that two bits of the act are engaged.

On the s149 I think a reasonable authority might (balancing human rights) conclude either that to allow this event would mean that we were failing in our duty and hence turn down the booking (helpful if we had this in our T and C's but not a killer that we don't) or for example say yes we appreciate this does not foster good relations between those with a protected characteristic (women and men and women and those who have had a gender reassignment) but bearing in mind the good work they do generally and freedom of assembly etc we think its ok on balance.

s29 I think is probably engaged. I note their QC didn't mention this so ran this past the person we use on this sort of thing and he thinks it is as well. However if we want to rely on this then we should allow another bite of the cheery. Having looked on the web it does look like anyone can come to this that have the protected characteristic. Looking at the programme it looks to me to be a conference/educational sort of event. It seems to me in theory possible for a transgender individual to sayIwant this service and require it as a woman and then not get it.

In theory (remote possibility) we could in allowing this be aiding and abetting a breach of s29 and could be sued. Damages likely to be hurt feelings etc. Also in theory some could seek an injunction to prevent it happening on these grounds if we said ok to it which again would I suggest be extremely unlikely.

Looking at the programme it all looks like reasonable stuff except arguably the below. This strikes me as directly anti -male. I also have to say I suspect that not allowing transgender is probably an extension of the anti-male stance and sort of saying you are still actually a man. I suspect this would be thought highly offensive to transgender individuals who I also suspect are among the most vulnerable individuals in society. I suspect that might be the logic of this "natural born woman" criteria which I confess I haven't come across before.