Dear Ms Helland

Request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002

Thank you for your email received on 4 March 2010 requesting that the following information be provided to you:

“Please provide memorandums, emails and briefings held regarding

concerns over Steven Purcell's health.”

The Council is treating your request as a request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Steven Purcell, former leader of Glasgow City Council and councillor for Ward 14 (Drumchapel/Anniesland) stood down as leader of the council on 2 March 2010 and resigned as a councillor on 5 March 2010.

The Council has subsequently received a large number of requests under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 seeking information relating to Mr Purcell's resignation. A number of these requests ask for the same, or very similar, information. In the interests of complying with our statutory duty to advise and assist applicants, and in order to put this information into the public domain as efficiently as possible, the Council has grouped the relevant requests for information into related strands. If you have asked for information in a given strand, the response below include all the information we have identified within that strand (apart from information we are withholding for some reason), even if the specific wording of your request might not quite have asked for the specific items in question.

In the interests of openness and transparency, the Council invited the Scottish Information Commissioner to assist with the search for information held by the Council which is covered by these requests. The Commissioner has unfortunately had to decline this invitation, because he must be able to reach an impartial view on the Council's handling of these requests if any of the applicants are unhappy with the response provided and remain unhappy after requesting an internal review by the Council. The Council has also had discussions with the (UK) Information Commissioner's Office regarding some of the requests where there is a significant data protection dimension to the information requested. These discussions have unfortunately delayed the Council's response.

The Council's Internal Audit section were asked to assist in the location and retrieval of relevant information, again in the interests of openness and transparency. Please note that due to the delay mentioned above, the Internal Audit checks have not yet been completed. We do not know if there is anything else to be found, but as our searches continue please be assured that we will proactively notify you of any additional information which comes to light.

Turning to the information you have requested:

As noted above, we are unable to search all Council records, emails etc without a disproportionate effort which would significantly exceed the cost limits laid down under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. However, in terms of the searches we have conducted of the most pertinent locations, we have identified that one draft document exists containing a proposed press release regarding Mr Purcell. The Council has already confirmed that the expression “chemical dependency” was used in a draft but that this expression was not agreed to by Mr Purcell or his external advisers. The Council has decided to withhold the text of the existing draft document in terms of the exemption contained in Sections 30(b)(i) and (ii), section 30(c) and section 38(1)(b) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act. An explanation of these exemptions and the Council's reliance on them can be found in the Annexe to this letter.

In relation to correspondence involving Mr Purcell's resignation, we are again unable, within the cost limit, to search for correspondence involving anyone across the Council. However, in terms of the searches we have conducted to date I would advise as follows:

In relation to the resignation of Steven Purcell, correspondence has been exchanged between several senior officers of the Council and Peter Watson of Levy and McRae. In relation to the correspondence the Council has received, this has been sent to the Council in confidence and Levy and McRae have made it clear in response to our requests for permission to release the information that they do not consent to it being released. In the circumstances we are therefore withholding this correspondence on the basis of the exemption contained in section 36(2) of the Act. So far as correspondence sent to Levy and McRae by the Council is concerned, the Council considers this to be exempt in terms of the exemptions contained in 30(c), 36(1) and 38(1)(b) of the Act.

We have identified exchanges which took place between Steven Purcell and Colin Edgar, Head of Communication and Organisational Development, within the timeframe you have mentioned. The only information we hold on communications between Colin Edgar and Steven Purcell in the time period you have specified consists of a text message exchange between them, as follows:

In addition, Mr Edgar forwarded the appended email to Mr Purcell at 18.09 on 26 February 2010 (third party names and email addresses have been removed from this).

We have further identified a number of text messages exchanged between Brian Lironi and Steven Purcell on 1 March 2010. However, we consider that all of these are exempt in terms of sections 30(b) and (c) and 38(1)(b) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Please note that the information provided in response to your request is, unless otherwise indicated, copyright © Glasgow City Council 2010. It is supplied to you in terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. Any further use by you of this information must comply with the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 as amended and/or the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997. In particular, any commercial use or re-use of the information provided requires the prior written consent of the Council.

Requests for such consent should be addressed to:

Head of PR & Marketing

Glasgow City Council

City Chambers

George Square

Glasgow

G2 1DU

Some or all of the information may be subject to third party copyright, in which case the permission of the third party copyright holder may be required. No claim is made in respect of third party copyright.

Please note that the information provided contains names and/or addresses. This information was provided to the Council in connection with particular statutory functions of the Council's and on the basis that it would only be used in connection with those purposes. Any use of this information for a different purpose may therefore contravene the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998.

If you are dissatisfied with the way Glasgow City Council has dealt with your request you are entitled to require the Council to review its decision. Please note that for a review to take place you must:

Executive Director of Corporate Services

Glasgow City Council

City Chambers

George Square

Glasgow G2 1DU

Email: [email address]

You will receive notice of the results of the review within 20 working days of receipt of your request. The notice will state the decision reached by the reviewing officer as well as details of how to appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner if you are still dissatisfied with the Council's response. You must request an internal review by the Council before a complaint can be directed to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

If you have any further queries regarding this process, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Dr Kenneth Meechan

Head of Information Governance

Enclosure:

From: Edgar, Colin (CEO)
Sent: 26 February 2010 18:09
To: Purcell, Steven; [redacted]
Subject: Fw: High Speed Rail Dover House Reception 9 March
Importance: High

From: Sara Thiam <[email address]>
To: [distribution list redacted]
Sent: Fri Feb 26 12:56:37 2010
Subject: High Speed Rail Dover House Reception 9 March

Dear All

Things are moving much faster in relation the anouncement on High Speed Rail than we had anticipated. John McTernan, Jim Murphy's advisor has just come back to me offering us a Dover House reception with the Secretary of State in London on 9 March from 6-7. It is very short notice I know but I think it is the only opportunity we will get for this type of influencing event in advance of Lord Adonis's anouncement, which is likely to be earlier than the anticipated 24 March.

Ideally we would want, if at all possible both Council Leaders and Crawford Gillies to be present with invititations to be issued to all Scottish MPs and public and private leaders from Edinburgh and Glasgow who would be armed with the key messages currently being worked up by our Public Affairs support Greenhaus.

I will follow up with Andy Nicol in Edinburgh to check Cllr Dawe's availability and speak informally to Brendan Dick, Owen Kelly, Lesley Sawyer etc to alert them to the event and check their availability. Anne can you please liaise with the Leader's office in Glasgow in the meantime and come back to me.

I look forward to your responses.

Sara

Sara Thiam | Collaboration Manager | Glasgow Edinburgh Collaboration Initiative | [email address] |

t 0131 469 3562 | t 0141 287 7279 | m 0750 0121154 | www.glasgow-edinburgh.co.uk

collaborating to compete
glasgow : edinburgh

City Collaboration is supported by the City of Edinburgh Council, Glasgow City Council and Scottish Enterprise

************************************************************************

This email and files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended for the sole use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed.

If you have received this eMail in error please notify the sender immediately and delete it without using, copying, storing, forwarding or disclosing its contents to any other person.

The Council has endeavoured to scan this eMail message and attachments for computer viruses and will not be liable for any losses incurred by the recipient.

************************************************************************

Annexe - explanation of reliance on exemptions

Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002

Exemptions relied upon and referred to above are:-

Section 30 Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs

Section 30 (b) disclosure of the information would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially-

Section 30 (c) disclosure of the information would otherwise prejudice substantially, or be likely to prejudice substantially, the effective conduct of public affairs.

The information you have requested is, in our opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in section 30 of the Act as set out above, thus in our opinion disclosure of the exemption would, or would be likely to inhibit or prejudice substantially the free and frank provision of advice of officers of the Council. The advice and discussions between officers (and on this occasion, elected members) would be likely to be inhibited if information of this type were to be released, to the substantial prejudice of the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation.

While we believe the exemption contained in section 30 applies in this case, we would still be obliged to release the information in response to your request unless the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Glasgow City Council acknowledges the significant public interest in openness and transparency and therefore recognises that any request under section 1 of the Act is potentially in the public interest. We also acknowledge the very significant public interest in the subject matter of your request. However, we also believe there is a significant public interest in authorities such as the Council being able to assess critically all factors involved in these types of decisions, and to reach the best possible decision. On occasions this can only be done on the basis of candid advice and a free exchange of views, of a sort which cannot take place if all information is disclosed. The public interest in openness and transparency is, we feel, satisfied by the release of all relevant information concerning the decisions ultimately reached and the reasons for these, without the need to disclose all the debate which surrounded these decisions. The Council is releasing significant amounts of information (limited, it has to be said, by the relatively small amount of information we actually hold relating to this matter), and we feel the information we are releasing is sufficient to meet that significant public interest. In the circumstances we feel that the specific public interest in safeguarding the small amount of information withheld outweighs the general public interest in openness and transparency.

Section 38 Personal Information

The information which you have requested is, in our opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in section 38 (1)(b) of the Act. In other words, in our opinion disclosure would involve disclosing personal data as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998, and that such disclosure would breach the Data Protection Principles contained in Schedule 1 Part 1 of that Act. We have sought to identify relevant conditions within the Data Protection Act 1998 which would justify the release of this personal data, but have concluded that none of these principles would be satisfied if we were to disclose the data in question. We are therefore unable to comply with your request.

Section 36 Confidentiality

The information which you have requested is, in our opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in Section 36(1) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. In other words, the material in question consists of information in respect of which the Council could maintain a claim to confidentiality of communications in legal proceedings.

While I have concluded that the exemption contained in section 36(1) applies in this case, the Council would still be obliged to release the information in response to your request unless the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. In this case, we take the view that only a compelling public interest would be sufficient to justify departure from the principle that communications between a lawyer and their client should remain confidential. While we acknowledge a significant public interest in the subject matter of your request, we are still not satisfied that this is sufficient to justify disclosure of the information withheld in this case, and accordingly we are unable to comply with your request.

The information which you have requested is, in our opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in section 36(2) of the Act. In other words, in our opinion disclosure of the information (which was obtained from a person or organisation outside the Council) would result in an actionable breach of confidence, as a result of the obligation of confidentiality arising at common law in the circumstances under which the Council acquired the information in question. We are therefore unable to comply with your request.

Glasgow - Proud Host City of the 2014 Commonwealth Games