Dear Sir or Madam,

According to the 2006/2007 statement of accounts, Rochdale
Metropolitan Borough Council entered into a 15 year joint venture
partnership with Mouchel Parkman Services Ltd on 1 April 2006, and
established Impact Partnership (Rochdale Borough) Ltd to deliver
property, highways, ICT and business services to the Council.

Please can I be sent a copy of:

* The contract entered into between Rochdale Metropolitan Borough
Council and Mouchel Parkman Services Ltd on 1 April 2006 for
establishing Impact Partnership (Rochdale Borough) Ltd.

* Any subsequent contract entered into between Rochdale
Metropolitan Borough Council and Impact Partnership (Rochdale
Borough) Ltd as a requirement of the partnership agreement).

Yours faithfully,

Julian Todd

Thank you for your e.mail, it has been forwarded to the relevant
department, who will reply to you directly.
Please note some council staff are on strike until Friday 18th July, so
there may be some delay in your response

show quoted sections

Performance & Development

Head of Service

Pam Smith

SERVICE UNIT

Data Protection & Freedom of Information

Service address:

Floor 10
PO Box 39, Municipal Offices,

Smith Street, Rochdale OL16 1LQ.

Tel: (01706) 925005

Fax: (01706) 925386

Email:[email address]

Web site: www.rochdale.gov.uk

Your ref:

Our Ref: 693.08

Enquiries: Catherine White

Date: 18/07/08

Dear Julian Todd,

RE: - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

I acknowledge with thanks your request for information held by Rochdale
Metropolitan Borough Council.

I write to advise to you that your request is being considered.

Please be advised that a charge may be applicable for your request. We
will advise you of this in due course.

Should you have any queries, please contact me on the number above.

Yours sincerely,

Catherine White

Data Protection & Freedom of Information Manager.

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and may also
be legally privileged. They are intended solely for the intended
addressee. If you are not the addressee please e-mail it back to
the sender and then immediately, permanently delete it. Do not
read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it. This e-
mail may be monitored by Rochdale Council in accordance with
current regulations. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail
message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses
currently known to the Council. However, the recipient is
responsible for virus-checking before opening this message and any
attachment. Unless otherwise stated, any views expressed in this
message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
reflect the views of Rochdale Council.

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this
email and/or any response under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 unless the information in the email and/or any response is
covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

Dear Catherine White,

In your reply on 18 July to my FOI request for the Mouchel Parkman
contract with the Council, you advised that a charge may be
applicable for my request.

Please inform me of what authority you are considering applying a
charge for emailing this information to my address, as there is no
provision to charge for documents disclosed under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

If the charges are being considered under the Re-use of Public
Sector Information Regulations 2005, I would am requesting
notification of either:

* Section 15(5) - any established standard charges which could
apply to this information I have applied to be sent;

or

* Section 15(7) - specifications of the factors that will be taken
into account in calculating the charge.

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd.

Your email has been forwarded to the appropriate section who will reply
to you directly, thanks

show quoted sections

Dear Julian Todd
I am writing in response to your Freedom of Information request. We have
taken this to be a request for a copy of the Strategic Partnering
Agreement (between Rochdale MBC and the Impact Partnership) and the
Joint Venture Agreeement (between Rochdale MBC, Mouchel Parkman and
Impact Partnership).
Because we believe that certain elements of the contract are
commercially sensitive, we need to claim an extension to the deadline to
allow more time to consider an exemption under Section 43 of the Freedom
of Information Act. I therefore propose a 2 week extension, with a new
deadline of 29 August.
Yours sincerely
Claire Sprowell
Client Services Manager

01706 924741

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and may also
be legally privileged. They are intended solely for the intended
addressee. If you are not the addressee please e-mail it back to
the sender and then immediately, permanently delete it. Do not
read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it. This e-
mail may be monitored by Rochdale Council in accordance with
current regulations. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail
message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses
currently known to the Council. However, the recipient is
responsible for virus-checking before opening this message and any
attachment. Unless otherwise stated, any views expressed in this
message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
reflect the views of Rochdale Council.

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this
email and/or any response under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 unless the information in the email and/or any response is
covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

Dear Claire Sprowell,

Thanks for considering my request. I await the response following
your proposed extension.

BTW I have seen in some specimen contracts[*] sections for the
solicitors to note down what parts of the contract are confidential
and how long for -- to make the job of satisfying FOI requests for
contracts easier. Perhaps this practice should be more widely
applied.

* ICT Services Contract (December 2007) -- Schedule 22 --
http://www.partnershipsforschools.org.uk...

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd.

Thankyou for your email, I have passed it to the appropriate section and
asked that they reply to you direct.

show quoted sections

Dear Julian Todd

Further to my previous e-mail I now require an extension to the time
limit to progress your request made under the Freedom of Information Act
2000. As we are considering an exemption under section 43 of the act, we
are required to consult with partners, and are awaiting their response.

I aim to provide you with a response by 30 September.

Regards

Claire Sprowell

Client Services Manager

01706 924741

[email address]

Want to know more about Client Services?
<http://tempintranet/i2PageServer/PageSer...
-9df6-0dd421c41584>

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and may also
be legally privileged. They are intended solely for the intended
addressee. If you are not the addressee please e-mail it back to
the sender and then immediately, permanently delete it. Do not
read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it. This e-
mail may be monitored by Rochdale Council in accordance with
current regulations. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail
message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses
currently known to the Council. However, the recipient is
responsible for virus-checking before opening this message and any
attachment. Unless otherwise stated, any views expressed in this
message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
reflect the views of Rochdale Council.

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this
email and/or any response under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 unless the information in the email and/or any response is
covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

Please find attached a response to your request. Please let me know if
you would prefer hard copies of anything.

Regards

Claire Sprowell

<<letter300908.doc>>

<<Strategic Partnering Agreement redacted.DOC>>
<<List of Schedules.doc>>
<<Sch 1- Definitions.doc>> <<Sch 5 - additional services F.doc>>
<<Sch 13 - Council Policies F.doc>> <<Sch 19 - Governance and
Monitoring Arrangements F.doc>> <<Sch 20 - Change Control F.doc>>
<<Sch 22 - Source Deposit F.doc>> <<Sch 26 - Key Staff F.doc>>

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and may also
be legally privileged. They are intended solely for the intended
addressee. If you are not the addressee please e-mail it back to
the sender and then immediately, permanently delete it. Do not
read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it. This e-
mail may be monitored by Rochdale Council in accordance with
current regulations. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail
message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses
currently known to the Council. However, the recipient is
responsible for virus-checking before opening this message and any
attachment. Unless otherwise stated, any views expressed in this
message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
reflect the views of Rochdale Council.

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this
email and/or any response under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 unless the information in the email and/or any response is
covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

Dear Claire Sprowell,

Thank you for your reply to my FOI request for the contracts
between Rochdale MBC and Mouchel Parkman Services establishing the
Impact Partnership (the Joint Venture Agreement), and subsequent
contracts between the Council and the established partnership (the
Strategic Partnering Agreement) I made on 17 July 2008.

I do not appear to have received any trace of the Joint Venture
Agreement, however.

In my opinion the extent of the redactions made to every part of
the Strategic Partnering Agreement documents add up to a refusal to
disclose anything of substance. I also feel that the letter sent to
me does not comply with Section 17 of the Freedom of Information
Act in its brief statement applying the Section 43 exemption to so
many different parts of the information.

As I have to single out something so that the internal review of
this case can happen swiftly (the ICO guidance sets a limit of 20
days), I wish to complain specifically about the total deletions of
Sections 158 (Confidentiality) and 159 (freedom of information)
from the Strategic Partnering Agreement. If the Council is not even
willing to publish its agreed standards for handling issues of
commercial prejudice and freedom of information, how can anyone
have confidence that it is living up to expectations?

Please consider this letter under Section 38 of the Freedom of
Information Code of Practice, which says:

"Any written reply from the applicant (including one transmitted by
electronic means) expressing dissatisfaction with an authority's
response to a request for information should be treated as a
complaint... [and] handled in accordance with the authority's
complaints procedure...."

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd

Dear Julian Todd

Thank you for your e-mail of 8 October.

In response to your complaint about the total deletion of the clauses
relating to Confidentiality and Freedom of Information, I have reviewed
their content. Please note that the correct clause numbers are 44 & 45.

Whilst these were originally classed as confidential when the agreement
was drawn up, on reviewing the detail the Council is now prepared to
publish this information.

Regards

Claire Sprowell
Client Services Manager

01706 924741
[email address]

Want to know more about Client Services?

show quoted sections

Dear Claire Sprowell,

Thank you for your reply answering my 8 October complaint about the
handling of my Freedom of Information request for the contracts
between the Council and Mouchel Parkman Services.

The two clauses (44 and 45) which explain how the Council has
agreed it will handle FOI requests for this contract refer to
Schedule 23 (Commercially Sensitive Information) in which I am
supposing that information which is confidential for specified
periods is itemized.

Please may I have a full copy of this Schedule 23 so that may
confirm the consistency to which it has been followed in relation
to my original 17 July FOI request?

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd