Dear Ms Bornshlegel

Freedom of Information Request F2009-140

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request dated 16 June 2009. You asked for copies of 8 documents held by DFID relating to British Gas Group's exploration of the Gaza Marine Field.

We have now completed our search and I confirm that DFID does hold the documents you requested. However, we are withholding the documents under the following sections of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Section 27 (1) (a) - (d) (International Relations)

(1) Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—

(a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other State,

(b) relations between the United Kingdom and any international organisation or international court,

(c) the interests of the United Kingdom abroad, or

(d) the promotion or protection by the United Kingdom of its interests abroad.

In applying the exemption under section 27 (1) (a) (b) (c) and (d), we have had to balance the public interest in withholding the information against the public interest in disclosing the information. There is a case for disclosure as it could contribute to a better understanding of how DFID engages with overseas governments and organisations. However, for DFID and the United Kingdom Government to promote international development and protect UK interests there must be good working relationships with these other governments based on confidence and trust. Disclosing opinions and sensitive information relating to them and their engagement with third parties would be likely to damage these relationships and the UK's ability to respond to international development needs. We have concluded that the balance of public interest in this case favours withholding the information.

Section 35 (Policy Development) Formulation of government policy,

(1) Information held by a government department or by the National Assembly for Wales is exempt information if it relates to—

(a) the formulation or development of government policy,

In applying the exemption under Section 35 (1) (a), we have considered the balance of public interest and recognise the significant general public interest in favour of openness and transparency. On the other hand, however, there is a very clear public interest in ensuring that officials are able to discuss and communicate candidly and efficiently in order to develop sound policy and to shape the policy making process. In particular, they need to be able to undertake rigorous and candid assessments of the risks to particular issues under consideration. Disclosure of the information requested is likely to inhibit this free and frank sharing of views and information between officials and so severely prejudice the policy development process. Releasing the information would have the effect of limiting the future candour of discussions in this policy area.

In addition, disclosure would prejudice DFIDs' ability to request and to be provided with advice that is sufficiently candid to enable the best decisions to be made in relation to future policy. There is a strong public interest in ensuring that policy decision-making is based upon the best advice available and on a full consideration of all the possible options, and we believe that releasing the papers would undermine this; and the risk of disclosure of similar documents in the future could lead to a reluctance by officials to commit to paper a whole range of arguments, judgements and ideas. Therefore the balance of the public interest in this case favours withholding the information.

Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)

Section 40 is an absolute exemption under the Freedom of Information Act and there is, therefore no requirement to balance the public interest. We are withholding details of individuals under Section 40 (2) of the Act as we believe that releasing details would breach the legitimate expectation of an individual's right to protection of their personal information.

Section 41 (1) (a) and (b) (Information provided in confidence): under section 41, information is exempt if (a) it was obtained by a public authority from any other person and (b) the disclosure of the information to the public by the public authority holding it would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person.

While we recognise the public interest in how government interacts with the private sector in relation to global projects, the information in question was provided to DFID as a courtesy as we also have interests/projects in the region. As the documents requested relate to discussions, briefings and ongoing negotiations, we feel that there is a very strong public interest in protecting their confidentiality. Disclosing details of commercial considerations or negotiations at this stage would have a detrimental affect on matters to which DFID are not a party. British Gas Group have, in our view, a reasonable expectation that details of their negotiations and discussion in relation to them would be treated in confidence. We believe releasing any of the information would be a breach of this confidence. As such Section 41 (Information Provided in Confidence) of the FOI Act applies.

Section 43 (2) Commercial interests

(2) Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it).

In the applying the exemption at section 43 (2) to withhold the documents, we have had to determine whether the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.

Factors in favour of disclosing this information include the general public interest in transparency in Government's dealings with the private sector and the development of business at an international level.

Factors against disclosure are the strong public interest in protecting the legitimate commercial interests of those who share information with DFID. Disclosure would make it less likely that companies or individuals would provide DFID with commercially sensitive information in the future, as our disclosure of this information would be likely to damage reputation and thus their ability to compete in the market place. The disclosure of commercial details and the approach to ongoing negotiations would have an adverse affect on their commercial interests. The disclosure of opinions on these negotiations and any perceived strengths or weaknesses would, similarly, have a damaging affect on the commercial interests of the parties involved. This would consequently undermine the ability of DFID to fulfil its role and to achieve value for money in the use of public funds.

We consider that the balance of public interest in this case favours withholding the documents due to the ongoing negotiations.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me, quoting reference F2009-140.

If you are unhappy with the service we have provided and wish to make a complaint or request a review of our decision, you should write to Openness Unit at the above address or email [DFID request email]

If you do make a complaint and are not content with the outcome, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the Information Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted DFID's complaints procedure. You can contact the Information Commissioner at:

The Information Commissioner's Office,

Wycliffe House,

Water Lane,

Wilmslow,

Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely,

John McGinn

Openness Unit

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED