Download original attachment
(Word document)
This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request
'Out of County school transport (SEN)'.
(Word document)
Miss K. Williams [FOI #44551 email]
13.10.10
|
ADRAN RHEOLWR GYFARWYDDWR/ DEPARTMENT OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
LYNN BALL LL.B., (Hons.)Cyfreithiwr/Solicitor CYFARWYDDWR GWASANAETHAU CYFREITHIOL A PHWYLLGORAU/SWYDDOG MONITRO / DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AND COMMITTEE SERVICES / MONITORING OFFICER
CYNGOR SIR YNYS MON / ISLE OF ANGLESEY COUNTY COUNCIL Swyddfa'r Sir / Council Offices LLANGEFNI Ynys Môn / Anglesey LL77 7TW
DX: 701771 - LLANGEFNI
ffôn / tel: (01248) 752588 ffacs / fax: (01248) 752132
E-Bost - E-mail: [email address]
Ein Cyf - Our Ref. BJ/CCO/154 Eich Cyf - Your Ref.
|
Dear Miss Williams,
CORPORATE COMPLAINTS AND COMPLIMENTS PROCEDURE - Application for a review of a decision to withhold information under the Freedom of Information Act.
Further to my letter dated 7.10.10, I enclose herewith the decision of the review meeting held on 13.10.10.
If you are not satisfied with the outcome of the review, you may appeal to the Information Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire. SK9 5AF.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours Sincerely,
Beryl Jones
Beryl Jones,
Customer Care Officer.
Internal Review on the decision to withhold information under the Freedom of Information Act - CCO / 154 - Miss K. Williams
Further to the request dated 14.9.10 and my letter dated 7.10.10 in relation to your request for an internal review into the way in which your freedom of information request was processed, this is a notice of the decision reached by the Review Panel.
The review meeting was held on the 13th October, 2010. The Corporate Information Office, the Compliance Officer and Chief Administration Officer for the Service and the Corporate Customer Care Officer were in attendance.
Background :
The request for information regarding “the number of parent that personally transport their SEN child to and from an out of county school for the LEA from April 2005 to April 2010 and also how many parents travel more than 500 miles a week getting the child to and from school from April 2005 to April 2010” was received on 15.8.10 and receipt of the same was acknowledged on 15.8.10.
The Review Meeting
All relevant paperwork was presented at the Review meeting and the discussion centered on the following:-
That the response was not made within the statutory time limit
Allegations by the applicant that the response provided was “false”
That the Council had not responded to the request if information about transport and residential costs.
Following a thorough discussion and perusal of the papers it was concluded as follows:-
The time taken to respond to the request was outside the 20 day limit and an e-mail was received from Miss Williams on 14.9.10 asking for a review as the deadline for a response was 13.9.10. However, a response was sent on 14.9.10 explaining that the Officer holding the information requested was away and that the request would be dealt with as a matter of priority on the officer's return to the office - an apology for the delay was also given.
Unfortunately, the requested information was not forwarded to Miss Williams until 27.9.10 and this delay is regrettable. In mitigation, it was noted that August is a month in which, traditionally, many officers from the Education Department take annual leave and this has contributed to the delay in responding as they then have to “catch up” with work during September.
However, the review felt that staff responsible for supplying information to Departmental Officers should attempt to do so with due regard to the Authority's obligations to provide access to information within the statutory time limit and the Corporate Information Officer would be writing to the Corporate Director - Education & Leisure in this regard.
The alleged “false response” was discussed at some length - the members of the review panel all took the wording of the original request, namely “for the LEA” to mean “on its behalf” and as such this implies a relationship between the” LEA” and the “parent” which would be contractual. When parents opt to transport their child (ren) to and from schools they do because that is their personal wish/ decision and not “for the LEA” as the LEA would always make appropriate arrangements for all children to travel to and from school.
It appeared to the panel that, by accusing the authority of lying, Miss Williams already had information with regards to her request but has not actually clarified the request in response to Mrs Owen's e-mail dated 28.9.10. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the response sent was a true response to the application for information and fully reflected the information held.
With regard to the alleged non response to a request for information not included in the original request. The Panel accepts Miss Williams's explanation that she was referring to another request on the “whatdotheyknow” website and did not discuss this other than to note that Miss Williams had no legal right to question or complain about another person's request and that the ICO would not investigate any such complaint.
Conclusion:-
The review found therefore that the authority was late in responding and as noted above a letter will be sent to the Corporate Director - Education & Leisure regarding the obligations of Officers under the Access to Information Legislation.
With regard to the other issues raised, the panel concluded that Miss Williams had received an appropriate response to her request. As for the third part of the review , the panel had nothing further to add.
Beryl Jones
Customer Care Officer.
13.10.10
wrk MJ/90231 |
Page 2 |
|
|