Central Policy Information Strategy
Freedom of InformationTeam
Room 1C/25
100 Parliament Street
London SW1A 2BQ
Lisa Evans [request-35268-
[email address]] by email only
Tel
Fax
Email
Date
7 July 2010
www.hmrc.gov.uk
Our Ref
1614/10
Your Ref
________
Freedom of Information Act 2000 Internal Review
Dear Ms Evans,
I refer to your email of 26 May 2010 asking for a review of HMRC’s reply to your earlier
request dated 16 May 2010.
Your request
In your original request you asked:-
“I would like to request the performance targets for Capgemini IT
services. I would like the targets that are key performance indicators to be labelled as
such.
I expect there to be around 500 performance targets and 200 key
performance indicators, according to section 12 of the following
document:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/31518/response/82808/attach/html/5/PAC
%20Report%20on%20ASPIRE%20competition.pdf.html”.
Our response
HMRC replied on 24 May 2010 that the information was exempt under s.43 (2) FOIA.
Information is available in large print, audio tape and Braille formats.
Type Talk service prefix number – 18001
Request for internal review
In your request for a review dated you stated:-
“I would like to clarify that I do not request "contract pricing and funding information"
but simply a list of performance indicators and their associated targets.
If there is information about "contract pricing and funding information" contained
within the performance indicators and their associated targets, then I am happy for
that information to be redacted.
I would like to point out that on applying the s.43 (2) exemption, HMRC should have
provided evidence that Capgemini consider the release of the information would be
prejudicial to their commercial interests. The ICOs guidance clearly states:
"The public authority must not speculate as to whether there is any commercial
detriment and the reasons why without any evidence or input from the third party."
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_spe
cialist_guides/commercialdetrimentof3rdparties.pdf”
I would like either:
*confirmation that HMRC have been in touch with Capgemini
specifically with respect to this request;
or
*a relevant excerpt from the contract between HMRC and Capgemini
which makes clear the information being sought would be
commercially detrimental if released.
I would like to add that transparency is in the public interest and has the potential to
save the public money; if Capgemini's competitors knew the details of the contract
they would be better positioned to seek ways to offer a better and cheaper service in
the future - release of the information would promote competition and promote the
operation of a free market.”
Internal review
The right in section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is to recorded information
held by a public authority at the date it received the request. Where the public authority
holds the information it is obliged to release it, subject to a number of exemptions, within the
statutory deadline.
I note that your request is dated16 May 2010 and that a full reply was sent to you on
24 May 2010 within the statutory deadline. I note that you have been told about your rights
to a review by HMRC and to complain, if dissatisfied, to the Information Commissioner.
I have considered the points you raised as part of my review and can comment as follows:
HMRC did not interpret your request as being solely for “contract pricing and funding
information”. We collaborated with Capgemini on the disclosure of performance targets for
IT services within the Aspire contract and were advised that
they are important
considerations in risk and pricing.
HMRC is unable, as you have now suggested, to provide you with a redacted copy of the
active Performance Indicators (PIs) and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) schedule as
disclosure of performance indicators and their associated targets; as these are classified as
market sensitive information which if published would potentially be useful to Capgemini’s
competitors and weaken their position in a competitive environment. Likewise disclosure
could prejudice HMRC’s commercial interest as a contracting authority and jeopardise our
ability to deliver best value.
The detailed mechanisms; thresholds and values in the Aspire contract are unique to
Capgemini and directly related to their pricing structure. Therefore the performance targets
are commercially sensitive both in themselves and as part of the whole contractual package.
As they are important factors in risk and pricing they are considered to be exempt from
publication under s.43 (2) FOIA, as disclosure would prejudice the commercial interest of
both HMRC and Capgemini.
Having reviewed the information and your request, I uphold the decision in our reply dated
24 May 2010, on balance the public purse is better positioned by ensuring that contract
pricing and funding information remains commercial in confidence and that this commercial
upper hand outweighs any public interest request in terms of how HMRC intends to buy IT
services in the future. It is also judged that the commercial risk of disclosing contextual
detail about the authority, its business objectives and plans is too great and far outweighs
the benefit or public interest of disclosing or placing in the public domain this information.
Conclusion
I confirm that this now completes the HMRC internal review process. If you are not satisfied
with the outcome of this review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for
a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at The Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
Margaret Earing
For and on behalf of
HMRC Information Management Services
