Dear Sir or Madam,

Could you please let me know what are the terms of reference for
the KPMG study on the Olympic venues, and when you expect the study
report to be in.

Yours faithfully,

John Bettelley

Dear Mr Bettelley,

Thank you for your request for information. Your request has been
logged and has been allocated for a response to be prepared. We aim to
respond to all requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
within 20 business days from the date of receipt, however if we are
unable to respond within that period or if we require clarification we
will make contact with you.

For all future contact with us in respect of this enquiry, please quote
the following reference number EN00207.

Yours sincerely

Penelope Jarvis

Information Law Compliance Manager

Legal Department

Olympic Delivery Authority
Mailpoint: 5A,

23rd Floor,

One Churchill Place,
Canary Wharf
London

E14 5LN

Switchboard: +44 (0) 203 2012 000

Fax: +44 (0) 203 2012 001

www.london2012.com <http://www.london2012.com/>

Find out what is going on at London 2012 HQ - http://blog.london2012.com

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

<hr width="100%">This email message has been scanned for viruses by Mimecast.
Mimecast delivers a complete managed email solution from a single web based platform.
For more information please visit <a href="http://www.mimecast.com">http://www.mimecast.com
<hr width="100%"></a>

Dear Mr Bettelley

Thank you for your request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act, please find attached our response to your request.

Should you have any difficulty in opening the attachment, please do not
hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely

Penelope Jarvis

Information Law Compliance Manager

Legal Department

Olympic Delivery Authority
Mailpoint: 5A,

23rd Floor,

One Churchill Place,
Canary Wharf
London

E14 5LN

Switchboard: +44 (0) 203 2012 000

Fax: +44 (0) 203 2012 001

www.london2012.com <http://www.london2012.com/>

Find out what is going on at London 2012 HQ - http://blog.london2012.com

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

<hr width="100%">This email message has been scanned for viruses by Mimecast.
Mimecast delivers a complete managed email solution from a single web based platform.
For more information please visit <a href="http://www.mimecast.com">http://www.mimecast.com
<hr width="100%"></a>

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 Olympic Delivery
Authority's handling of my FOI request 'KPMG Study'.

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

I understand from the “whatdotheyknow” website that if I am not
happy with the response to my FOI enquiry, I am entitled to request
an “internal review”. The following are the reasons for my request:

1. Given that “the ODA understands the importance of acting in an
open and transparent manner, etc etc”, it is most disappointing
that this quite straightforward enquiry under the Freedom of
Information Act took up until 17.45 on the 20th day following the
initial email – the last possible moment permitted under the rules.
I know that everyone is very busy, but there seems to be nothing in
this response which could not have been put together within, say, 5
days. It is hard to avoid the impression of cynicism by the ODA in
its treatment of these questions.

2. It is wholly unsatisfactory for you to tell me that “the full
terms of reference ….held by the ODA on explicit and/or implicit
terms that make it subject to a duty of confidence” without
disclosing at least:

• which third party or parties would be thus exposed?

• what kind of information is it which, if disclosed, (and given
the fairly straightforward context of this enquiry) would give rise
to legal action?

It is clear that we are not talking about a commercial contract
which, if the detailed terms were disclosed, would give valuable
information to a rival. What, in simple terms, are we talking
about?

It is not credible that the whole of the information processed by
the ODA in formulating instructions to KPMG was obtained from
outside the ODA, and therefore that any of that information would
“constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other
person”.

3. You say that KPMG was “instructed by the ODA with input from
DCMS to assist in the evaluation of the options analysis for” the 4
venues, and the review of the ODA value engineering study. These
instructions and the DCMS input clearly formed a substantial part
of the terms of reference given to KPMG, and fall well within my
request for disclosure, and I request that you spell out what they
are.

4. In your following paragraph, KPMG “conducted interviews with key
stakeholders”: it is important to know to which stakeholders they
were directed. Similarly, “ KPMG was also provided with additional
information in relation to” the 4 venues and the options analysis “
in order to assess the project status, potential alternatives and
reasons for discounting alternative possible venues”. What was this
information?

In summary:

• I cannot accept that all of the information requested is covered
by Section 41

• There is manifestly a public interest argument covering this
information, and it is difficult to see without further explanation
why disclosure would constitute a breach of confidence.

• I contend that the ODA has not fulfilled its obligations under
the Freedom of Information Act, and I request a prompt Internal
Review as allowed under the Act.

Yours sincerely

John R Bettelley

Dear Mr Bettelley

We have received your request for an internal review of FOI request
EN00207 in respect of access to the KPMG Terms of Reference. Your
request has been logged and has been referred to an appropriate person
in the ODA for consideration. Although there are no statutory time
periods for the resolution of internal reviews, we aim to respond to all
reviews within 20 business days, however if we are unable to respond
within that period we will make contact with you.

For all future contact with us in respect of this enquiry, please quote
the following reference number APP0013.

In addition, we note that your request for an internal review contains
what we consider to be a new request for information under the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA). Specifically, your point 4 requests:

a) The names of the stakeholders KPMG were directed to in relation
to the interviews which KPMG carried out; and

b) What additional information which KPMG was provided in order to
carry out its obligations.

These two new requests for information have been logged and allocated
for a response to be prepared. As you know we aim to respond to all
requests for information within 20 business days from the date of
receipt. However, if we are unable to respond within that period, or
require further clarification we will contact you.

The new FOIA request has been allocated the following reference number -
EN00224. We would be grateful if you would refer to this reference
number in all correspondence regarding this request for new information.

Yours sincerely

Penelope Jarvis

Information Law Compliance Manager

Legal Department

www.london2012.com

Find out what is going on at London 2012 HQ - http://blog.london2012.com

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

show quoted sections