/
Information Management Unit
Rosepark House – Annexe
711-715 Upper Newtownards Road
Belfast
BT4 3N4R
Tel: 028 9052 6763
Email:
Date: 29th August 2012
Dear Mr Brown,
FOI Internal Review DFP/IR/2012-0019 OF FOI request NO. DFP/2012-0292
You asked on the 31 July 2012 for the handling of your recent Freedom of Information Request (DFP/2012-0292) to be reviewed in view of the lateness of the Department’s response. I subsequently asked Ray Wright to conduct an internal review.
Mr Wright has completed that review and his findings are set out in his note to me, attached at Annexe A.
I hope that you agree that the Department has dealt properly with your request for a review of your case. If are still unsatisfied you have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
K McCready (Mrs)
Annexe A
To: Karen McCready
Information management Unit
Date:24 August 2012
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION INTERNAL REVIEW DFP/IR/2012-0019 OF FOI CASE DFP/2012-0292
As requested on 31 July 2012, I have reviewed Mr Ben Brown’s FOI request DFP/2012-0292. In asking for this review, Mr. Brown raised two specific issues:
1“All I wanted to clarify was does the Finance Minister’s special adviser read each FOI question before it is answered? All that is required is a yes or no.”
2“Why did it take so long to answer these questions?”
The original request for information was received on 23 May 2012 and a review of the papers shows that a draft substantive reply was prepared within the 20 day time limit for replies, set out in Section 10(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. In the event, the final reply did not issue until 24 July 2012, well outside that time limit. The delay in issuing the final response was due to revised handling procedures adopted late last year by the Department of Finance and Personnel. These do not constitute an acceptable reason for the Department failing to meet its statutory duty to release requested information (or provide a valid reason why the information is being withheld), within twenty working days of the request. I must conclude that the Department has failed to meet its obligations in this regard.
Turning to the substance of the reply sent to Mr Brown, I note that information requested about the costs related to the employment of special advisers was considered by the Department to be exempt under Section 21 (1) of the FOI Act 2000, on the grounds that the information was readily available through other channels. The Department did however provide precise details of where the information could be located and so I conclude that in this case the exemption was properly applied.
Mr Brown asked specifically about the role of special advisers in reading replies to FOI requests in advance of Ministers. The Department explained in its response that special advisers perform duties “as requested by Ministers”. The internal working practices and processes of a government office do not constitute “recorded information” in relation to the FOI Act 2000, unless such practices and processes have been formally documented. I conclude that the Department was not obliged to answer this question under a Freedom of Information request. The Department has however provided the following link to a document which set outs the process for appointing special advisers and describes the range of duties they may perform if requested to do so by Ministers.
http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/review-of-arrangements-for-the-appointment-of-ministers-special-advisers.pdf
R Wright
FOI Review Officer