Monday 1 September 2008
Dear Mr Smith
Thank you for your request, received by us today.
From a strict standpoint, we do not hold any information covered by your request as we do
not believe we have made a ‘complaint’ about the What Do They Know website (and have
no intention of doing so); however we did raise an issue for discussion about the website
at the FOI Live conference.
An FOI Officer was scheduled to attend the conference and we in the corporate unit
discussed the matter with them beforehand. A copy of an e-mail chain revealing the
extent of our correspondence is included as an appendix to this document. We have
informally discussed various issues relating to the website, as other public authorities may
have done as well. As the FOI Live event is one of the main conferences for FOI
practitioners, and was attended by representatives from the Information Commissioner’s
Office (ICO), it seemed to be the most appropriate platform at which to discuss these
issues more widely.
The specific questions asked at the event referred to the practice of the website to publish
all correspondence between the applicant and the authority. The Information
Commissioner was asked whether he felt the site should automatically publish all
correspondence when it didn't necessarily constitute the 'information' requested? It was
also queried whether that correspondence is automatically considered to be in the public
domain, as information released under the FOI Act is. We were simply keen to get the
ICO’s opinion on the matter and did not pose the questions as a ‘complaint’ against the
website.
We also mentioned the What Do They Know website at our FOI/Records Management
Team meeting in June (as suggested in the e-mail chain below) and a copy of the relevant
item from the minutes is supplied below.
3.4
A website has been launched called ‘What do they Know?’ which allows
members of the public to make FOI requests via the website. All
correspondence with the applicant, including the final response, is immediately
published on the Internet.
Again, this was not a case of raising a ‘complaint’ about the site, but simply making officers
aware that all correspondence to a request submitted
via the site is published on the
Internet. The e-mails sent by the What Do They Know system do now carry a disclaimer
to state this fact, but this was not the case originally. We felt it would be unfair on an
officer to be corresponding with an individual, unaware that their e-mails were being
published on the Internet; therefore we decided to bring it to their attention.
FOI Response – 2008-09-01
Page 1 of 4
These matters are practical issues relating to the website though. Please be assured that
they have not, and will not, alter our approach of replying to all FOI requests within the
legal requirements as stated by the FOI Act and also within the spirit of openness that the
Act promotes.
Yours sincerely
Matthew Smith
Freedom of Information and Data Protection Assistant
FOI Response – 2008-09-01
Page 2 of 4
APPENDIX -----Original Message-----
From:
Gallop, Stephanie
Sent:
22 May 2008 08:27
To:
Smith, Matthew
Subject:
RE: FOI Live
I see what you mean.
So what we need to establish is whether the website should only be publishing the actual information
released or seeking consent from the authority before it publishes any other letters, responses etc?
Technically the content may only be contentious if we are refusing information and then the reasons for
applying an exemption might be something we would want to keep between ourselves and the requestor.
My only concern with that would be that if it were appealled up to the ICO then those reasons would be
published in any decision notice and thus be in the public domain.
I will see if anyone raises it and if not i'll try.
Many thanks,
Stephanie Gallop
Records and Client Access Manager
Adult Social Services
Norfolk County Council
-----Original Message-----
From:
Smith, Matthew
Sent:
21 May 2008 15:30
To:
Gallop, Stephanie
Subject:
RE: FOI Live
Yes, it could help with determining whether the request is vexatious, although the ICO
notes in his guidance that there may be valid reasons why the applicant wants to see
what info is held by different authorities on the same topic. So like all these things, it
would depend on the specific circumstances of the case.
I'm not sure about the aggregating bit. The actual fees regulations specifically refer to
"the public authority" in the section on aggregating costs and don't give any indication
that we could aggregate with other authorities. I think this was something raised in the
Fees consultation a year or so ago, but wasn't taken forward. I might be wrong though.
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: Gallop, Stephanie
Sent:
21 May 2008 13:55
To:
Smith, Matthew
Subject: RE: FOI Live
Doesn't this also help us to see which requestors are sending round robin requests and thus it can
be rejected for being over the £450 limit? It could also help to identify vexatious requestors. But I do
agree that they shouldn't really post our response without our consent, only the actual information
that is requested is in the public domain if it's released.
Many thanks,
Stephanie Gallop
Records and Client Access Manager
FOI Response – 2008-09-01
Page 3 of 4
Adult Social Services
Norfolk County Council
-----Original Message-----
From:
Smith, Matthew
Sent:
21 May 2008 12:23
To: Gallop, Stephanie
Subject:
FOI Live
Hi Stephanie
Just a pre-FOI Live query.
A website has been created called What Do They Know? It is a system through
which people can make FOI requests, meaning that all correspondence
(acknowledgement, actual response etc) is immediately published on the
Internet. We have recently received three requests
via this method (as shown
here: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/norfolk_county_council ) and will
undoubtedly receive more.
We will mention it at our next FOI Team meeting so that all FOI Officers are
aware of this, but I imagine that it is an issue that will be brought up at FOI Live,
not least on the basis of whether they have the right to publish the information
without our consent. If it is mentioned, we would be interested to know what is
said.
Thanks
Matt
FOI Response – 2008-09-01
Page 4 of 4
Document Outline
