Mr Ganesh Sittampalam
[FOI #13544 email]
12 October 2009
Dear Mr Sittampalam,
Request for Information – RFI20091098
I write further to my letter of 16 September 2009.
Please find attached the second and final set of documents that we are disclosing in respect of this request
– namely, the contract between ourselves (the BBC) and Capita Business Services Ltd. (‘Capita’). Please
note that the main contract document is in consolidated form – i.e. it is a version that has been amended to
reflect all the formal variations that have been agreed by the parties since it was originally signed. Two
appendices are also attached for your information: each forms part of the contract, but cannot be
incorporated into the consolidated document for practical reasons.
Please note that, as you were forewarned would be the case in my letter of 9 June, various parts of the
contract document have been redacted. This is because we consider in each case the information
contained therein to be exempt from disclosure under the terms of the Act. As you will see, each instance
of redaction has been annotated to indicate which exemption has been applied. In the vast majority of
cases, the exemption used is that which relates to the protection of commercial interests, section 43.
Section 43 states that information will be exempt under the Act if its disclosure would, or would be likely
to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it). In the case
of each redaction indicated, the BBC is of the view that the release of the information would be prejudicial
to either its own commercial interests, or those of Capita, or both, because to do so would reveal details
which were the subject of significant negotiation; and/or would reveal details about our suppliers services
and methodologies, the likes of which are not available on its competitors; and/or would reveal market
sensitive information which would be of benefit to competitors in any future tendering process for such
services.
Since section 43 is a qualified exemption, I am required by section 2(2) of the Act to consider the public
interest factors in this case. This I have done under the heading ‘
Why information has been withheld’ below.
Some information has also been withheld under section 31, which relates to law enforcement (specifical y,
because disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, the
apprehension or prosecution of offenders, the col ection of the licence fee and the BBC’s ability to
discharge its public functions in respect of such matters). This is because in each case the redacted
segments contain information which could be useful to people attempting to evade the licence fee. Again,
the use of this exemption must be qualified, and accordingly, the justification for its use here is dealt with
under ‘
Why information has been withheld’ below.
Finally, on a small number of occasions, section 40(2) has been cited. This is because, in each case, the
information redacted constitutes personal data. In most instances, the data concerned is the name of an
individual no longer working for or with TV Licensing. These individuals would no longer expect their
personal data to be disclosed in this context and associated with TV Licensing, and therefore we consider
that to do so would be unfair to them. Signatures of individuals comprise the remaining redactions made
under section 40(2); these have been removed because we consider that the risk to the individuals
concerned of fraud (i.e. identity theft) that might result from the publication of their signatures would make
such disclosure unfair. In these instances therefore we have withheld personal information because its
disclosure would breach the first principle of the Data Protection Act 1998, which requires data to be
processed fairly.
Please note that, although this is a consolidated version of the contract between the BBC and Capita,
because it was originally drawn-up some time ago, some of the information contained therein that has no
material bearing upon the performance of contract (such as, for example, old company addresses and
references to legislation that has been superseded) may be out of date.
Why information has been withheld
I am required under section 2(2) of the Act to assess whether the public interest in maintaining the
exemptions used herein outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
The following factors are in favour of disclosure:
1. ensuring that public funds are being appropriately applied, and specifically that:
i.
the TV Licensing system is being efficiently run; and
ii.
value for money is being obtained.
2. ensuring that the BBC is getting value for money in respect of its use of the licence fee when
purchasing goods and services.
3. ensuring that the licensing authority is exercising its functions as regards the enforcement of the TV
Licensing system appropriately and proportionately.
4. ensuring that the public has access to sufficient information to enable it to contact TV Licensing and
seek accountability for TV Licensing’s activities.
I consider that the above public interest factors in favour of disclosure are already served by the following:
1. The fact that the BBC is required to satisfy the National Audit Office ('NAO') as to the value for
money of the collection and enforcement arrangements and is accountable for the economy,
efficiency and effectiveness of such arrangements. (NAO's most recent audit, dating from 18
January 2007, is published online at
www.nao.org.uk/publications).
2. The fact that the BBC is also subject to the oversight of the BBC Trust (which is responsible for
commissioning value for money investigations into specific areas of BBC activity under Article
24(2)(i) of the BBC Charter) and the Executive Board (which is responsible for conducting the
BBC’s operational affairs in a manner best designed to ensure value for money under Article
38(1)(h) of the Charter).
3. The fact that the BBC has reduced the cost of collection from 6.2% of the total licence fee
collected in 1991/2 (when it took over responsibility from the Home Office), to 3.6% for the
financial year 07/08. This demonstrates that the TV Licensing system is being efficiently run. This
and further related information is available in the BBC’s annual report (see
www.bbc.co.uk) and the
TV Licensing Annual Review
(see www.tvlicensing.co.uk/aboutus).
In addition, I consider that the following factors are in favour of withholding the information:
Section 43
1. The need for the BBC to maintain a strong bargaining position vis-à-vis suppliers during contractual
negotiations in order to ensure that the licence fee is spent effectively.
2. The fact that the competitive position of companies in their particular market is not disadvantaged
by doing business with the BBC. It would not be in the public interest to disclose sensitive
information about a particular company if that information would be likely to be used by
competitors to gain a competitive advantage.
Section 31
3. The BBC has a duty to enforce the television licensing system and it is essential that effective
deterrents against evasion are maintained for this purpose.
4. Without an effective deterrent to licence fee evasion, evasion would invariably increase. This
would be to the detriment of the honest majority of people who are properly licensed and to the
overall amount of revenue available to the BBC.
5. An increase in the rate of licence fee evasion would lead to an increase in detection costs.
6. An increase in the costs of detecting licence fee evasion would lead to a decrease in the available
funds to be put towards producing the BBC’s content.
In this instance, the public interest is served by ensuring that the commercial aspects of the contracts with
the BBC’s TV Licensing partners are protected, and by maintaining an effective deterrent to licence fee
evasion and thus in turn protecting the BBC’s revenue stream to produce its output.
Hence, I consider that there is a greater public interest in ensuring the effective collection of the licence fee
than in disclosing the information you have sought. I am therefore satisfied, in terms of section 2 of the
Act, that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the
public interest in disclosing the information.
Your appeal rights
This enquiry has been dealt with under the Terms of the Freedom of Information Act. If you are not
satisfied that we have complied with the Act in responding to your request you have the right to an internal
review by a BBC senior manager or legal adviser. Please contact us at the address above, explaining what
you would like us to review and including your reference number. If you are not satisfied with the internal
review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner's Office, which is contactable at: Wycliffe House,
Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Telephone: 01625 545 700 We
bsite: www.ico.gov.uk
Once again, I would like to apologise for the severe delay to you receiving this information, but I hope you
will appreciate the amount of work involved to collate and assess the information requested.
Yours sincerely,
Neil Gardner
Senior Policy Adviser, TV Licensing Management Team
