Direct Communications Unit

2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF

Switchboard 020 7035 4848 Fax: 020 7035 4745 Textphone: 020 7035 4742

E-mail: [Home Office request email] Website: www.homeoffice.gov.uk

[email address]

Reference: T 16029/9 and 12799

2 December, 2009

Dear Mr Taylor,

I am writing further to the correspondence of 10 November 2009 regarding your information request dated 15 September 2009 in which you ask about four TASER International products, together with copies of any protocols, reports and timetables relating to the evaluation of these products. We are now in a position to provide you with a full reply to your request

Firstly, however, I would like to apologise for the length of time it has taken us to provide you with a response to your request under the Freedom of Information Act. As I am sure you can appreciate, some of the information you have requested is of a sensitive nature and I have had to ensure that we have received and acted upon the appropriate guidance when providing you with a response to this request.

I am pleased to be able to disclose most of the information that you requested and some additional information that we hope adds clarity to your request. Taking each of the questions in order:

1. and 2. HOSDB has ordered 5 of the current XREP Cartridges and one X12 shotgun for limited evaluation. HOSDB has entered into a tripartite assessment programme with the National Institute of Justice in the US and the Canadian Police Research Centre in Canada to jointly fund an independent assessment of XREP by Wayne State University. An assessment of TASER International's initial design (later classed as a prototype) was carried out in February 2008 and presented at the European Working Group on Non-Lethal Weapons conference held in Ettlingen, Germany in May 2008. TASER International has re-launched the XREP at their own conference this year after making a number of improvements and the rounds are due to be re-assessed by Wayne State University in the Autumn. If this assessment is promising a more detailed assessment programme to identify and address any possible medical implications of use would be developed and undertaken.

A copy of the paper presented in Ettlingen is attached. If the assessment of the current round proves promising and testing moves forward to the next stage the report on the new round would be made available on the Home Office Website in the same way as assessments of the TASER X26 and M26 hand held units have been.

3. HOSDB has in its possession one TASER Shockwave. This has been borrowed from the UK agents for TASER International to assess whether it can be modified to provide a test rig for providing controlled release of TASER cartridges. It is not being considered for use in the UK for its original purpose.

4. HOSDB purchased 5 TASERCams for evaluation purposes. We still have these in our possession. A report on the evaluation has been published on the Home Office Website. Link is:

http://science.homeoffice.gov.uk/hosdb/publications/police-weaponry/03-08_Taser_Cam_Evaluation_1.pdf?view=Standard&pubID=564100

With regard to the second part of your request about the number of each product held by others in the UK, we neither confirm nor deny whether we hold any additional information relevant to this part of your request by virtue of sections 23(5) of the Freedom of Information Act - information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security matters. Section 23(5) is an absolute provision and consequently there is no further consideration required. This response should not be taken as conclusive evidence that any further information you have requested exists or does not exist.

In keeping with the spirit and effect of the Freedom of Information Act, all information is assumed to be releasable to the public unless exempt. The department therefore, will be simultaneously releasing to the public the information you requested together with any related information that will provide a key to its wider context.

After careful consideration we have decided that some of the information relevant to your request in respect of reports in possession of the Home Office is exempt from disclosure by virtue of sections 41(1) and 43(2) of the Act relating to information provided in confidence and commercial interests respectively. Section 41 of the Act is an absolute exemption. However, the common law of confidence which underpins this exemption is subject to a Public Interest Test (PIT). The relevant PIT for this and the qualified exemption at section 43 of the Act can be found in the annex to this letter.

If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our handling of your request by submitting your complaint to one of the addresses below and quote reference 12799.

Information Access Team

Information and Record Management Service

Home Office

4^th Floor, Seacole Building

2 Marsham Street

London

SW1P 4DF

Email: [email address]

During the independent review the department's handling of your information request will be reassessed by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Yours sincerely

Alan Pratt

Director

Home Office Scientific Development Branch

ANNEX

Public Interest Test (PIT) Considerations

Section 43(2) - Commercial Interests

The Exemption

`43(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).'

Considerations Favouring Disclosure

The Home Office recognises that there is a general public interest in openness and transparency in all aspects of government. Openness increases public trust and confidence in government. Such a development should lead to greater engagement in political debate and policy discussions, as the general public become better informed on all aspects of the work of government. Such a development would clearly be in the public interest.

There is also a specific public interest in providing information which shows that the requirements of the assessment process, which all less lethal options are required to undertake, are being robustly maintained. The process has been designed to provide public reassurance that weaponry used by police forces meets the requirements of ACPO and the Home Office. The release of this information would go some way to showing that these devices meet those standards and that the assessment process is being robustly adhered to.

Considerations Favouring Non-disclosure

The considerations favouring disclosure must however be balanced against those factors favouring non-disclosure. These include the need to protect the commercial interests of manufacturers and the integrity of the assessment process. Release of some of the requested information would also make companies less likely to enter into the assessment process in future and could lead to police forces not having access to the best equipment.

The information in possession of the Home Office was provided for the purposes of assessment, and was provided in confidence. Part of the information relevant to your request (The report on the assessment of the original XREP rounds) concerns detailed information that does not relate to the current XREP rounds. This information is unique to that specific product and if acquired by a competitor would put the manufacturer at a distinct commercial disadvantage. The public interest in this instance is best served by ensuring that potential suppliers are treated fairly and on a level playing field. Releasing this information which would put a particular company at a disadvantage to others could result in market distortion and erode the benefits of free competition among manufacturers of less lethal weaponry. Such an outcome could eventually lead to an increase in prices and costs to the taxpayer and indeed to the companies concerned.

For the reasons outlined above we consider that the public interest in non-disclosure outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the relevant information.

Section 41(1) - Information Provided in Confidence

The Exemption

'41(1) Information is exempt information if-

Note

Although section 41 is an absolute exemption, the common law of confidence which underpins its use is subject to a Public Interest Test. A consideration of these factors has therefore been included here.

Considerations Favouring Disclosure

As above

Considerations Favouring Non-Disclosure

As above. In addition, the submission of sensitive commercial information by weaponry manufacturers underpins the credibility of the assessment process. Throughout its operation, the Home Office Scientific Development Branch (HOSDB) has proven its ability to maintain absolute confidentiality throughout and subsequent weaponry assessment. Any release of information would clearly damage the relationship between manufacturers and HOSDB and could place in jeopardy the future integrity of this process. It is in the public interest that police forces have access to the most up to date equipment available for the purposes of increasing the safety of the police and the public.

For the reasons described above we consider that the public interest in non-disclosure outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the requested information.

More information regarding the Code of Practice for Police Weaponry can be found on the Home Office's Police website at the following:

http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/operational-policing/useoffirearms.pdf