Data Retention Common Purpose

The request was successful.

Dear Information Commissioner’s Office,

You confirmed that advice was given and correspondence exists between ICO and Common Purpose when answering my previous request

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/29...

Please disclose

Yours faithfully,

Barry Hutton

Information Commissioner's Office

Link: [1]File-List

25 May 2011

Case Reference Number IRQ0393311

Dear Mr Hutton

Thank you for your email of today in which you have made a freedom of
information request to the ICO.

We understand that the previous request you are referring to was handled
under reference IRQ0299152.

Your request has been passed to the Internal Compliance Team, and is being
dealt with in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 under
the reference number shown above.  We will therefore respond to your
request by 23 June 2011 which is 20 working days from the day after we
received your request.

If you wish to add further information to your request case please reply
to this email, being careful not to amend the information in the
‘subject’ field. This will ensure that the information is added
directly to your case. However, please be aware that this is an automated
process; the information will not be read by a member of our staff until
your case is allocated to a request handler.

Yours sincerely

Helen Ward

Lead Internal Compliance Officer

show quoted sections

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.gov.uk

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/rad1BE05_files/filelist.xml

Information Commissioner's Office

Link: [1]File-List

23rd June 2011

Case Reference Number IRQ0393311

Dear Mr Hutton

Request for Information

Further to our acknowledgement of 25 May 2011, I can confirm that we have
located and collated all the information held by the Information
CommissionerÂ’s Office (ICO) which falls within the scope of your
request of information, also dated 25 May 2011.

However, having considered the matter further we take the view that the
exemption at section 31(1)(g) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the
FOIA) is likely to apply to the information we hold.  Section 31
broadly applies to information which, if disclosed, may “prejudice
Â… the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the
purposes specified in subsection (2)”.  The relevant purposes
referred to in subsection (2) are “(a) the purpose of ascertaining
whether any person has failed to comply with the law” and “(c) the
purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify
regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may
arise.”. 

As you may be aware the FOIA obliges us to respond to requests promptly,
and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving the
request.  However when a qualified exemption applies to the information
and the public interest test is engaged, section 10(3) of the FOIA allows
the time for response to be longer than the 20 working days, and a full
response must be provided within such time as is reasonable in all
circumstances of the case. 

Whilst we always aim to make all decisions within 20 working days,
including cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies
in respect of a request for exempt information, we have not yet reached a
decision on where the balance of the public interest lies in this
case.  Therefore, as we estimate that it may take up to an additional
20 working days to take this decision we aim to provide you with a full
response your request for information by Thursday 21 July 2011. 

 

I apologise for this delay, but we will certainly respond to this
remaining part of your request as soon as possible, and certainly within
this timeframe. 

Yours sincerely

Antonia Swann Lead Internal Compliance Officer

Information CommissionerÂ’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

T. 01625 545894  F. 01625 524510  [2]www.ico.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.gov.uk

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/rad9289B_files/filelist.xml
2. blocked::http://www.ico.gov.uk/
http://www.ico.gov.uk/

Information Commissioner's Office

2 Attachments

Link: [1]File-List

12th July 2011

Case Reference Number IRQ0393311

Dear Mr Hutton

I write with reference to your request for information of 25 May 2011 and
further to our acknowledgment letters of the same date and 14 and 23 June
2011.  We are now in a position to respond.

As you know we have dealt with your request in accordance with your
‘right to know’ under section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 (FOIA), which entitles you to be provided with a copy of any
information ‘held’ by a public authority, unless an appropriate
exemption applies.

Request

Your request asked:

‘You confirmed that advice was given and correspondence exists
between ICO and Common Purpose when answering my previous requestÂ’

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/29...

Our previous response had advised that:

‘Please note that we have communicated with Common Purpose regarding
issues relating to their compliance with the Data Protection Act mainly,
fair processing information offered to data subjects. While this
information falls outside the scope of your request, you can of course
submit a new
request for itÂ’.

Information Held

I can confirm that the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) holds
recorded information which falls within the scope of your request. 
Attached to this response are redacted versions of some of that
information.

Information Withheld

Some correspondence between Common Purpose and the ICO has been withheld
as it is exempt from disclosure under Section 44 of FOIA which places
prohibitions on disclosure.  Section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA states;

‘(1) Information is exempt information if its disclosure (otherwise
than under this Act) by the public authority holding it -

(a) is prohibited by or under any enactmentÂ’

The enactment in question is the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) and
specifically Section 59 of the DPA. Section 59 states that neither the
Commissioner nor his staff shall disclose;

“any information which :

(a)has been obtained by, or furnished to, the Commissioner under or for
the purposes of the information Acts.

(b)relates to an identified or identifiable individual business, and

(c) is not at the time of disclosure, and has not been available to the
public from other sources,

unless the disclosure is made with lawful authority.”

The prohibition is intended to ensure that those providing information to
this office may be confident that the Commissioner will handle their
information in an appropriate manner and will only disclose information
where it is necessary to do so. 

Where there is no lawful authority for the disclosure of information
obtained or furnished to the Commissioner under or for the purposes of the
Information Acts, section 59 DPA will act as a statutory prohibition on
disclosure for the purposes of section 44 FOIA.   On consideration
of the information contained in these letters and the confidential nature
in which it was provided we have concluded that we have no lawful
authority to release it under FOIA.

We have also withheld in its entirety a copy of a meeting note which
details a visit from ICO to Common Purpose and sections of Andrew
Laing’s letter of 6 November 2009.  This information is exempt
under section 31(1)(g) of FOIA.

The exemption at section 31(1)(g) of the FOIA refers to circumstances
where the disclosure of information “would, or would be likely to,
prejudice – … the exercise by any public authority of its
functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2).” 

The purposes referred to in sections 31(2)(a) and (c) are –

“(a) the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to
comply with the law” and

 “(c) the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would
justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise
…”    

Clearly, these purposes apply when the Information Commissioner is
visiting an organisation to establish whether they have complied with any
of the legislation which the Commissioner regulates.

However, this exemption is not absolute.  When considering whether to
apply it in response to a request for information, there is a ‘public
interest test’.  That is, we must consider whether the public
interest favours withholding or disclosing the information.   

In this case the public interest factors in disclosing the letter are
–

· increased transparency in the way in which the Common Purpose
responded to the ICOÂ’s enquiries during the visit

· increased transparency in the way in which the ICO conducts
investigations

The factors in withholding the letter are –

o the public interest in maintaining organisations trust and confidence
that the details discussed during such visits will be afforded an
appropriate level of confidentiality.
o the public interest in organisations being open during such visits
from the ICO about the way they have handled compliance with
legislation without fear that all the detail will be made public.
o the public interest in maintaining the ICOÂ’s ability to conduct
the investigation into complaints concerning whether a breach has
occurred, as it thinks fit,

Having considered all of these factors we have taken the decision that the
public interest in withholding a copy of the meeting note outweighs the
public interest in disclosing it. 

Furthermore, where information was provided to the ICO during the meeting
this information would also be exempt under Section 44 of FOIA for the
reasons set out above.

Finally, where redactions have been made to the provided information and
unless stated otherwise, these redactions have been made under Section 40
of FOIA by virtue of Section 40(3)(a)(i).  

Section 40(2) of (FOIA) allows a public authority to withhold information
from a response to a request under the FOIA when the information requested
is personal data relating to someone other than the requestor, and its
disclosure would contravene one of the Data Protection principles.

The information that has been redacted within the information is
information relating to the details of individual complaints. We consider
that when individuals make complaints to the ICO they do not anticipate or
expect the details of their complaints, or any actions taken by the data
controller concerned or the Information Commissioner in connection with
their complaints, to be disclosed to anyone else.  Therefore, we
consider that such a disclosure would be unfair and in breach of the first
Data Protection principle which states that – “Personal data shall
be processed fairly and lawfully …”

I hope this information is of some interest and assistance.  However,
If you are dissatisfied with the response you have received and wish to
request a review of our decision or make a complaint about how your
request has been handled you should write to the Internal Compliance
Department at the address below or e-mail
[2][email address]

Your request for internal review should be submitted to us within 40
working days of receipt by you of this response. Any such request
received after this time will only be considered at the discretion of the
Commissioner.

If having exhausted the review process you are not content that your
request or review has been dealt with correctly, you have a further right
of appeal to this office in our capacity as the statutory complaint
handler under the legislation.  To make such an application, please
write to the First Contact Team, at the address below or visit the
‘Complaints’ section of our website to make a Freedom of
Information Act or Environmental Information Regulations complaint online.

 

A copy of our review procedure is attached.

Yours sincerely

Charlotte Powell

Internal Compliance Manager

show quoted sections

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.gov.uk

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/rad330D9_files/filelist.xml
2. mailto:[email address]

John Walker left an annotation ()

This related FOI request may be of interest:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/em...

Fred Ormerod left an annotation ()

For some reason the ICO have redacted the case reference number from the documents - apart from on page 24 of the attachment, where it states: RFA0234888