eMandate data

This is an open government request for information to which I am
entitled under the Freedom of Information Act. In order to assist
you with this request, I am outlining my query as specifically as
possible. If however this request is too wide or too unclear, I
would be grateful if you could contact me as I understand that
under the legislation, you are required to advise and assist
requesters.

I would like you to supply me with the complete data set held on
eMandate for the past 3 years for all colleges in England (ie
2006-7, 2007-8, 2008/9).

I look forward to your earliest reply.

Mr Everett

Dear Amanda,

Thank you for your acknowledgement of my request placed through
whatdotheyknow.com

I am confused - why have you associated this with another request
from Richard Everett of Intelligent Builders Limited. These two
requests are not related in any way.

I would be grateful if you would disentangle this request from the
unrelated Intelligent Builders request.

Yours sincerely,

Mr S Everett

Dear Russel,

I am wondering why you require my details, when you can very easily
just provide the information that I have requested via this
website.

I am also interested in the information you have sought from the
ICO, and request that a copy of this guidance is also sent to me.

I am apprehensive at giving you my personal details, as you have
already mixed up my request with another completely unrelated
request bar the surname, and published their personal details on a
public website. I would at the minimum hope that you have informed
this individual that you have published their details, in relation
to a request that they have not made.

Furthermore it is common knowledge that the LSC does not have a
good history when it comes to the storage of personal information
and as stated above your mix up of surnames just reinforces this.

As you currently have my details and in accordance with a decision
made by the ICO (letter from ICO to Rother District Council Aug
2008), an E-mail is an acceptable form of communication. In
addition The Ministry of Justice has given guidance on this – "As
well as hard copy written correspondence, requests that are
transmitted electronically (for example, in emails) are acceptable
... If a request is received by email and no postal address is
given, the email address should be treated as the return address."

I therefore repeat my request to have the information sent via the
current method, and in a readable medium.

Yours sincerely,

Mr S Everett

Dear Russel,

The time for your responding to this request is now one week
overdue. I do understand that this request has spanned a holiday
period and so have given you some leeway on timing - however an
extra week for your response would seem sufficient and so I can
only surmise that you are using delaying tactics as part of your
response strategy.

If you do not respond by the close of play this evening with the
requested information then I can only assume that you wish this to
be escalated to an internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Everett

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Learning and Skills
Council's handling of my FOI request 'eMandate data'.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/em...

Yours faithfully,

Mr Everett

Dear Bailey Russel,

An acknowledgement to my internal review request of 2nd September
has not yet been received from the LSC. Please can you 'nudge'
whoever is responsible for dealing with the internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Everett

Dear Mahers Donna,

Thank you for responding to my application for an internal review
of my request for eMandate data where an exception has been claimed
by the LSC under EIR section 12(5). The full documentation of the
original request can be found at:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/em...

It is my contention that this request has not been dealt with
appropriately:

in terms of timescales (ie not dealt with within the 20 day time
limit – absolute in EIR)
a refusal using an inappropriate exception has been claimed by the
LSC – EIR Section 12(5)c
the LSC did initially commit to supplying the data – and have
subsequently overturned that commitment

I therefore expect the data set required in the eMandate request to
be supplied to me at the address supplied in the original request
(ie through the Whatdotheyknow website).

As you will be aware “There is a strong inherent public interest in
releasing environmental information.” And that regulation 12(2)
directs public authorities to apply a presumption in favour of
disclosure.” December 2008 1 EIR: An introduction to the exceptions

Environmental Information Regulations section 12(5)c
In your refusal to supply the eMandate data requested under the
Freedom of Information Act provisions you state that you are
relying on the Environmental Information Regulations section 12(5)c
which is a qualified exception (not an exemption as you state). You
will no doubt be aware that “Regulation 12 of the EIR sets out
various exceptions allowing public authorities to refuse to
disclose environmental information. However, all the exceptions in
the EIR are subject to a public interest test.” EIR: An
introduction to the exceptions.
To engage a 12(5) exception in the EIR the LSC must be able to show
with certainty the harm that releasing the information in question
would cause. The LSC have not demonstrated that. The relevant words
in the guidance are “would” - it has to be shown that that the
adverse effect is more likely than not, and not that the disclosure
“could” or “might” have such an effect. I refer you to two relevant
cases:

Burgess v Information Commissioner & Stafford Borough Council
(EA/2006/0091; 7 June 2007)
Archer v Information Commissioner & Salisbury District Council
(EA/2006/0037; 9 May 2007)
The exception 12(5)c you rely upon, of intellectual property
rights, would of course also have to be demonstrated – I am not
aware of any data within the data set I have requested that could
even tenuously be described as being intellectual property (ie
patents, trademarks and designs, unregistered rights, such as
copyright, and unregistered design rights). Exception 12(5)c
specifically does not cover confidential information. Most
importantly though “If the information would enjoy protection, even
after disclosure, from the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, for
instance, the case against disclosure would be considerably
weaker.” and this is even before you have applied the public
interest test.
The Public Interest Test
Finally even if you were able to demonstrate that an (albeit
tenuous) intellectual property right were to exist within the data
set requested then you are required to apply the public interest
test. It is undoubtedly the case that the publishing of this data
will further “the understanding of and participation in the public
debate of issues of the day” - namely whether college accommodation
is in a fit state to deliver education (especially in the light of
the total debacle over the LSC’s recent capital funding fiasco). I
also argue that the publication of this data promotes
accountability and transparency of both the LSC and decisions taken
by them (and colleges involved in new builds) as well as promoting
accountability and transparency in the spending of public money. In
addition it allows individuals and companies to understand
decisions made by colleges and the LSC in relation to capital
funding for planning and implementing new buildings – highly
important in today’s environment where colleges need new buildings
and private industry (and finance) could potentially aid in
supplying those buildings in a collaborative and cooperative
manner.
I would therefore formally like to apply for a review on the
rationale contained above including the fact that the 20 day
timescale was not met. I require the full data set to be supplied
as originally requested.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Everett

Dear Mahers Donna,

That is an acceptable summary. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Everett

Dear R Bailey,

I am intrigued to know how you are representing the Learning and
Skills Council as they ceased to exist as an organisation in April.
Please can you advise how and who you are acting on behalf of in
responding to this request.

You may be aware from the thread of this request that this has been
referred to the Information Commissioner. Are you in contact with
them regarding this matter and if so is this communication a formal
response to that action.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Everett