Dear Mr McCloy

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000

I refer to John Morgan's letter of 5 May 2010 to you following the review of the Department of Finance & Personnel's delay in providing the information that you requested on 1 February 2010. The Department has now completed its search for the information you requested and I wish to advise you that some of the information cannot be disclosed for the reasons given in this letter.

The Department is applying the exemptions available under Section 36 (2) (a) (i) and Section 36 (2) (b) (ii) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act provides that information is exempt if, in the opinion of a `qualified person' (a Department's Minister) its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prohibit the free and frank disclosure of views for the purpose of deliberation.

It is the qualified person's opinion that certain documentation relating to correspondence or contact between the Department and others regarding research into contact with children are exempt under section 36 (2)(a)(i) and Section 36 (2) (b) (ii) as disclosure under the Act would, or would be likely to, inhibit -

This is likely to be prejudiced because -

It is the Department's view that disclosure of the information identified, and the potential disruption disclosure would cause, would have the effects as set out above. The Department contends that disclosure of the specified papers would not be in the public interest. In considering the decision to exempt the information under Section 36 (2) (a) (i) and 36 (2) (b) (ii), the Department has taken the following public interest considerations into account:

For Disclosure:

Against Disclosure:

a. the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation would be inhibited if that disclosure would be prejudicial to the effective conduct of public affairs;

b. the ability of officials when deliberating or providing advice to express themselves openly, honestly and completely, or to explore extreme options will be inhibited; and

c. the imparting or commissioning of advice, or the offering or requesting of opinions or considerations is likely to be inhibited;

d. release of the information may be detrimental to the ultimate quality of either policy making or other decision-making and that this will lead to less candid and robust discussions, insufficient records being created, hard choices being avoided and ultimately the quality of policy development being undermined.

In balancing where the public interest lies, the Department contends that the public interest considerations against disclosure are judged predominant and the public interest would be better served by non-disclosure of the specified information.

The Department is applying the exemption available under Section 27, International Relations, of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to e-mails regarding the ratification of the Contact Convention. Section 27 (1) of the Act provides that information is exempt if its disclosure would or would be likely to harm UK interests.

The Department contends that disclosure of this information would not be in the public interest. In considering the decision to exempt the information under Section 27 (1), the Department has taken the following public interest considerations into account:

For Disclosure:

a. the right of the public to have access to information;

disclosing information held by the Department; and

Against Disclosure:

Disclosure might result in damage to the UK and EU Partners.

In balancing where the public interest lies, the Department contends that the public interest considerations against disclosure are judged predominant and the public interest would be better served by non-disclosure of the specified information.

The Department is applying the exemption available under Section 28 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to e-mails regarding research planning summary prepared by the Department of Constitutional Affairs for its own research on the issue of contact respectively. Section 28 (1) of the Freedom of Information Act provides that information is exempt if the disclosure of the information in question would or would be likely to prejudice relations between two or more United Kingdom administrations.

The Department contends that disclosure of this information would not be in the public interest. In considering the decision to exempt the information under Section 27 (1), the Department has taken the following public interest considerations into account:

For Disclosure:

a. the right of the public to have access to information;

disclosing information held by the Department; and

Against Disclosure:

In balancing where the public interest lies, the Department contends that the public interest considerations against disclosure are judged predominant and the public interest would be better served by non-disclosure of the specified information.

The Department is applying the exemption under Section 40 of the Act to redact the personal details of individuals in the preliminary analysis of questionnaires from court users so as to not breach the data protection principles set out in schedule 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

The Department is also applying the exemption available under Section 41 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to the preliminary analysis of questionnaires from court users. Section 41 provides that information is exempt where it is provided by the confider and an expectation of confidentiality is obvious or implied from the circumstances and any breach of confidence would be actionable.

The Department contends that disclosure of this information would not be in the public interest. In considering the decision to exempt the information under Section 41, the Department has taken the following public interest considerations into account:

For Disclosure:

a. the right of the public to have access to information;

b showing compliance with the spirit of the FOI Act 2000 by

disclosing information held by the Department; and

Against Disclosure:

Disclosure of the information would give rise to an actionable

breach of confidence.

In balancing where the public interest lies, the Department contends that the public interest considerations against disclosure are judged predominant and the public interest would be better served by non-disclosure of the specified information.

The Department is applying the exemption available under Section 42, Legal advice privilege, of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to an e-mail regarding current law on parental responsibility. Section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act provides that information is exempt where information is covered by legal professional privilege and the public interest is better served in maintaining the exemption and withholding the information.

The Department contends that the legal professional privilege - legal advice exemption is engaged and disclosure of this information would not be in the public interest. In considering the decision to exempt the information under Section 42, the Department has taken the following public interest considerations into account:

For Disclosure:

a. the right of the public to have access to information;

b showing compliance with the spirit of the FOI Act 2000 by

disclosing information held by the Department; and

c. In the public interest to know the current status of the law in regard to the matters requested.

Against Disclosure:

It is in the public interest that the decisions taken by government

are taken in a fully informed legal context. Government departments

therefore need high-quality, comprehensive legal advice for the

effective conduct of their business. That advice needs to be given in

context, and with a full appreciation of the relevant facts.

The legal adviser needs to be able to present the full picture to his or her departmental clients, which includes arguments in support of his or her final conclusions with relevant counterarguments. It is in the nature of legal advice that it often sets out the possible arguments both for and against a particular view, weighing up their relative merits. This means that legal advice obtained by a government department will often set out the perceived weaknesses of the department's position.

Without such comprehensive advice the quality of the government's

decision-making would be much reduced since it would not be fully

informed and this would be contrary to the public interest.

Disclosure of legal advice has a significant potential to prejudice the

government's ability to defend its legal interests, both directly, by

unfairly exposing its legal position to challenge, and indirectly by

diminishing the reliance it can place on the advice having been fully

considered and presented without fear or favour. Neither of these

scenarios is in the public interest. The former could result in serious

consequential loss, or at least in a waste of resources in defending

unnecessary challenges. The latter may result in poorer decision-

making because the decisions themselves may not be taken on a

fully informed basis.

In balancing where the public interest lies, the Department contends that the public interest considerations against disclosure are judged predominant and the public interest would be better served by non-disclosure of the specified information.

A copy of the information which can be disclosed is enclosed in the format you requested.

You have the right to request that the Department formally review this decision within two calendar months of the date of this letter. If you wish to do so, please write to the Department of Finance and Personnel's Information Management Unit, 1st Floor, ISU Building, Rosepark, Upper Newtownards Road, Belfast BT4 3NR.

If after such an internal review you are still unhappy with the response, you have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, CHESHIRE SK9 5AF, who will undertake an independent review . The Information Commissioner's leaflet, 'Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations - When and how to complain' provides further advice on making a complaint. The leaflet can be accessed through the Information Commissioner's Website at:

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/practical_application/ico_foi_eir_how_to_comp_final.pdf

If you have any queries about this letter please contact Mrs Laura McPolin at the above address or by telephone on (028) 902 51277. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

The supply of information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) does not give the recipient or organisation that receives it the automatic right to reuse it in any way that would infringe copyright. This includes, for example, making multiple copies, publishing and issuing copies to the public. Permission to re-use the information must be obtained in advance from the Controller of HMSO who has responsibility for the licensing of Crown Copyright material. For further details on how to apply for a licence please see: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Leonard

DECLAN LEONARD

INFORMATION MANAGER

Enc.

7

By e-mail to:

Mr Hugh McCloy

[email address]

Departmental Solicitor's Office

Victoria Hall

12 May Street

Belfast

BT1 4NL

Telephone: (028) 902 51253

E-mail: [email address]

Your ref:

Our ref: FOI 21615

Date: 12 May 2010