Information about your dealings with Stonewall [Extraneous material removed]

Ermine Amies made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Tate (Gallery)

Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Tate (Gallery).

Dear Tate,

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Please provide any information that you hold answering to any of the following descriptions:

1. Any application you made in 2019 or 2020 to be a “Stonewall Diversity Champion” or to be included on Stonewall’s “Workplace Equality Index,” including any attachments or appendices to those applications. Please redact personal details if necessary.

2. Any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to either application or programme.

3. Any other communication you have received from Stonewall in 2019 or 2020 unless privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure (but if you claim privilege or exemption in relation to any material, please say in broad terms what the material is and the basis on which you claim to be entitled to withhold it).

4. Full details of any equality impact assessment you carried out connected with any of these applications (including any equality impact assessment carried out prior to an earlier application of the same kind, if no further assessment was done).

5. Details of the total amount of money you paid to Stonewall (i) in 2019; (ii) in 2020, whether or not as payment for goods or services.

6. Whether you intend to continue your membership of any Stonewall scheme in the future, and if so which.

Yours faithfully,

Ermine Amies

FOI, Tate (Gallery)

Dear Ermine,

 

Thank you for your request for information.

 

Your email (our ref: 892) was received by the Freedom of Information Group
on the 5^th of February 2021. It will be dealt with under the terms of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000, however due to the current situation and
closure of the galleries, we will aim to respond to your query as soon as
possible. The ICO are aware we may not be able to meet the current 20
working day rule, many of us are working from home and this may limit the
resources we have access to.

Please bear with us during this time.

If you have any queries about this email, please contact me.

 

Diana Vladutu

On Behalf of Tate’s Freedom of Information Group [1][Tate (Gallery) request email]

 

From: Ermine Amies <[FOI #724650 email]>
Sent: 05 February 2021 14:56
To: FOI <[Tate (Gallery) request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Information about your dealings
with Stonewall #DontSubmitToStonewall

 

Dear Tate,

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Please
provide any information that you hold answering to any of the following
descriptions:

1. Any application you made in 2019 or 2020 to be a “Stonewall Diversity
Champion” or to be included on Stonewall’s “Workplace Equality Index,”
including any attachments or appendices to those applications. Please
redact personal details if necessary.

2. Any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to
either application or programme.

3. Any other communication you have received from Stonewall in 2019 or
2020 unless privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure (but if you
claim privilege or exemption in relation to any material, please say in
broad terms what the material is and the basis on which you claim to be
entitled to withhold it).

4. Full details of any equality impact assessment you carried out
connected with any of these applications (including any equality impact
assessment carried out prior to an earlier application of the same kind,
if no further assessment was done).

5. Details of the total amount of money you paid to Stonewall (i) in 2019;
(ii) in 2020, whether or not as payment for goods or services.

6. Whether you intend to continue your membership of any Stonewall scheme
in the future, and if so which.

Yours faithfully,

Ermine Amies

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[2][FOI #724650 email]

Is [3][Tate (Gallery) request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to Tate (Gallery)? If so, please contact us using this form:

[4]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[5]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:

[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please note that any information sent, received or held by Tate may be
disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Tate (Gallery) request email]
2. mailto:[FOI #724650 email]
3. mailto:[Tate (Gallery) request email]
4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...
5. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
6. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Jessica Clifford, Tate (Gallery)

Dear Ermine Amies,

 

Thank you for your request for information. I’m writing to update you that
given staff departures, we will need a few more weeks to respond to this.

 

Many thanks for your patience at this time.

 

Kind regards,

Jessica Clifford

 

On behalf of Tate’s Freedom of Information Group

 

 

From: Ermine Amies <[FOI #724650 email]>
Sent: 05 February 2021 14:56
To: FOI <[Tate (Gallery) request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Information about your dealings
with Stonewall #DontSubmitToStonewall

 

Dear Tate,

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Please
provide any information that you hold answering to any of the following
descriptions:

1. Any application you made in 2019 or 2020 to be a “Stonewall Diversity
Champion” or to be included on Stonewall’s “Workplace Equality Index,”
including any attachments or appendices to those applications. Please
redact personal details if necessary.

2. Any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to
either application or programme.

3. Any other communication you have received from Stonewall in 2019 or
2020 unless privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure (but if you
claim privilege or exemption in relation to any material, please say in
broad terms what the material is and the basis on which you claim to be
entitled to withhold it).

4. Full details of any equality impact assessment you carried out
connected with any of these applications (including any equality impact
assessment carried out prior to an earlier application of the same kind,
if no further assessment was done).

5. Details of the total amount of money you paid to Stonewall (i) in 2019;
(ii) in 2020, whether or not as payment for goods or services.

6. Whether you intend to continue your membership of any Stonewall scheme
in the future, and if so which.

Yours faithfully,

Ermine Amies

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[1][FOI #724650 email]

Is [2][Tate (Gallery) request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to Tate (Gallery)? If so, please contact us using this form:

[3]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[4]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:

[5]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please note that any information sent, received or held by Tate may be
disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #724650 email]
2. mailto:[Tate (Gallery) request email]
3. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...
4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
5. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Dear Jessica Clifford,

Noted.

Yours sincerely,

Ermine Amies

Gadawodd Ermine Amies anodiad ()

Delayed due to staff departures.

Jessica Clifford, Tate (Gallery)

2 Atodiad

Dear Ermine Amies,

 

Many thanks for your continued patience. With regard to your recent
request for information, please see attached for our response.

 

Best,

 

Jessica Clifford

on behalf of the Freedom of Information Group

 

[1]cidimage001.png@01D6D49B.C78F8760

 

 

From: Ermine Amies <[FOI #724650 email]>
Date: Friday, 5 March 2021 at 11:30
To: Jessica Clifford <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request - Information about your
dealings with Stonewall #DontSubmitToStonewall

 

Dear Jessica Clifford,

Noted.

Yours sincerely,

Ermine Amies

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Jessica,

A belated thank you,

I've spoken to the ICO who said you might be willing to consider undertaking an internal review as its less than 6 months since you responded to me. If you agree, I will drop you a note with the reason for the review.

Please advise.

Yours sincerely,

Ermine Amies

Jessica Clifford, Tate (Gallery)

Dear Ermine,

 

Thanks for your email.

 

Yes, we will proceed with an internal review as requested. Please could
you clarify the parameters?

 

Many thanks,

Jess

 

From: Ermine Amies <[FOI #724650 email]>
Date: Thursday, 17 June 2021 at 10:14
To: Jessica Clifford <[email address]>
Subject: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Information
about your dealings with Stonewall [Extraneous material removed]

 

Dear Jessica,

A belated thank you,

I've spoken to the ICO who said you might be willing to consider
undertaking an internal review as its less than 6 months since you
responded to me. If you agree, I will drop you a note with the reason for
the review.

Please advise.

Yours sincerely,

Ermine Amies

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Jessica,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Tate's handling of my FOI request 'Information about your dealings with Stonewall .

I am requesting an internal review, with particular focus on the public interest test, which I think has overlooked some important points in favour of disclosure.

In response to my request for any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to either application or programme, you said
“Please see the response above.”

That answer was:
“Tate did not submit an application to the Stonewall Equality Index for 2020 (documents are submitted in the preceding year, in this case 2019), or for 2021. Membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme does not require an application or submission. “

This does not answer my question on programme feedback.

Part of the Diversity Champions programme is tailored email and phone support and advice through a dedicated account manager, feedback & policy review “for LGBT inclusion” by Stonewall staff, introductions to other “Diversity Champion” members and more.

So I would expect input, advice and discussion of your policies and procedures with Stonewall staff would be disclosed.

In answer to the third question you said
“We confirm we that we do hold a small amount of correspondence that we received over the period 2019-20. This includes non-specific newsletters and webinar invites, and correspondence relating to the commercial aspects of the previous years. For the purposes of this request, we have taken the generic communication to be out of scope. Communications on commercial matters are withheld under the exemptions provided for by Section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act. The relevant text is detailed in the appendix below (Appendix A). Tate’s Freedom of Information Group recognises the public interest in your request, but consider that the rights of both communicating parties to conduct commercial discussions in private should be maintained. “

If your concern is that disclosure might prejudice Stonewall’s commercial interests, you need to demonstrate why your disclosures would, or would be likely to, disadvantage them.

Please note that detailed information on the format, submissions, feedback information and pricing is in the public domain as other organisations have fully answered similar FOI requests.

Here are some examples of the comprehensive responses made by other bodies when asked the same/similar questions. You may wish to consider following their example as regards the detail provided.

The responses provided by Sussex University: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...

The responses provided by Edinburgh University: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

The responses provided by ACAS: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...

As you may be aware, ICO guidance advises that while confidentiality clauses can be useful in helping to identify commercially sensitive information, they should not be applied to an entire contract. (https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...)

Please review your response and, if the exemption is upheld, provide all of the requested information not covered by the confidentiality clause.

Please also reconsider whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in its disclosure.

There is strong public interest in openness to enable the public to better scrutinise the public monies spent and to enable members of the public to engage with, and challenge you on, how you spend public money. You will be aware there is strong public interest in Stonewall's influence on the public sector and the related costs.

There are 3 areas of public interest you should consider in your review.

1) The strong case for openness and transparency in your dealings with Stonewall, given the Equality Minister's call for all public sector organisations to leave Stonewall and current discussion in Parliament & the media.

2) The accountability for spending public money on advice from an organisation that the Reindorf Review found has an erroneous understanding of the law, basing advice, directions on policy and requirements on the law as Stonewall would prefer it to be, rather than the law as it is.

3) Your Public Sector Equality Duty - withholding this information obstructs your execution of your Public Sector Equality Duty including the duty to advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not and the duty to foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. Withholding this information makes it difficult for members of other protected characteristics to engage with your equality & diversity activities and policies , and challenge you on them.

With this in mind, I would be grateful if you could review your response, and, if the exemption is upheld, provide details of the public interest test conducted around the decision.

It took 40 work days to answer my initial request so I hope to hear the result of your reveiw more promptly.

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

Yours,

Ermine Amies

For ease of reference, here is your response to my request:
1. Any application you made in 2019 or 2020 to be a “Stonewall Diversity Champion” or to be included on Stonewall’s “Workplace Equality Index,” including any attachments or appendices to those applications. Please redact personal details if necessary.

Tate did not submit an application to the Stonewall Equality Index for 2020 (documents are submitted in the preceding year, in this case 2019), or for 2021.
Membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme does not require an application or submission.

2. Any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to either application or programme.

Please see the response above.

3. Any other communication you have received from Stonewall in 2019 or 2020 unless privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure (but if you claim privilege or exemption in relation to any material, please say in broad terms what the material is and the basis on which you claim to be entitled to withhold it).
As noted above, Tate did not submit an application to Stonewal ’s Workplace Equality Index in either 2019 or 2020. We confirm we that we do hold a small amount of correspondence that we received over the period 2019-20. This includes non-specific newsletters and webinar invites, and correspondence relating to the commercial aspects of the previous years. For the purposes of this request, we have taken the generic communication to be out of scope. Communications on commercial matters are withheld under the exemptions provided for by Section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act. The relevant text is detailed in the appendix below (Appendix A). Tate’s Freedom of Information Group recognises the public interest in your request, but consider that the rights of both communicating parties to conduct commercial discussions in private should be maintained.

4. Full details of any equality impact assessment you carried out connected with any of these applications (including any equality impact assessment carried out prior to an earlier application of the same kind, if no further assessment was done).

Tate’s membership of the Diversity Champions programme is a paid-for service and did not require a EQIA.

5. Details of the total amount of money you paid to Stonewall (i) in 2019; (i ) in 2020, whether or not as payment for goods or services.
[Answer is confusing but I think it is:] Stonewall Equality Diversity Champions Membership 13/3/19 - £2,500.00
12/3/20 Stonewall Equality Diversity Champions Membership - £2,500.00
6. Whether you intend to continue your membership of any Stonewall scheme in the future, and if so which.
We intend to renew Tate’s membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme for 2021-22.

FOI, Tate (Gallery)

Dear Ermine,

 

Thank you for your request for information.

 

Your request for the internal review for the FOI request #892 was passed
to the team.  

 

Your email  was received by the Freedom of Information Group on the 28^th
of June 2021. It will be dealt with under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000, however due to the current situation and closure of
the galleries, we will aim to respond to your query as soon as possible.
The ICO are aware we may not be able to meet the current 20 working day
rule, many of us are working from home and this may limit the resources we
have access to.

Please bear with us during this time.

If you have any queries about this email, please contact me.

 

Diana Vladutu

On Behalf of Tate’s Freedom of Information Group [1][Tate (Gallery) request email]

 

From: Ermine Amies <[FOI #724650 email]>
Sent: 28 June 2021 00:59
To: FOI <[Tate (Gallery) request email]>
Subject: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Information
about your dealings with Stonewall [Extraneous material removed]

 

Dear Jessica,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Tate's handling of my FOI
request 'Information about your dealings with Stonewall .

I am requesting an internal review, with particular focus on the public
interest test, which I think has overlooked some important points in
favour of disclosure.

In response to my request for any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020
from Stonewall in relation to either application or programme, you said

“Please see the response above.”

That answer was:

“Tate did not submit an application to the Stonewall Equality Index for
2020 (documents are submitted in the preceding year, in this case 2019),
or for 2021. Membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme
does not require an application or submission. “

This does not answer my question on programme feedback.

Part of the Diversity Champions programme is tailored email and phone
support and advice through a dedicated account manager, feedback & policy
review “for LGBT inclusion” by Stonewall staff, introductions to other
“Diversity Champion” members and more.

So I would expect input, advice and discussion of your policies and
procedures with Stonewall staff would be disclosed.

In answer to the third question you said

“We confirm we that we do hold a small amount of correspondence that we
received over the period 2019-20. This includes non-specific newsletters
and webinar invites, and correspondence relating to the commercial aspects
of the previous years. For the purposes of this request, we have taken the
generic communication to be out of scope. Communications on commercial
matters are withheld under the exemptions provided for by Section 43 (2)
of the Freedom of Information Act. The relevant text is detailed in the
appendix below (Appendix A). Tate’s Freedom of Information Group
recognises the public interest in your request, but consider that the
rights of both communicating parties to conduct commercial discussions in
private should be maintained. “

If your concern is that disclosure might prejudice Stonewall’s commercial
interests, you need to demonstrate why your disclosures would, or would be
likely to, disadvantage them.

Please note that detailed information on the format, submissions, feedback
information and pricing is in the public domain as other organisations
have fully answered similar FOI requests.

Here are some examples of the comprehensive responses made by other bodies
when asked the same/similar questions. You may wish to consider following
their example as regards the detail provided.

The responses provided by Sussex University:
[2]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...

The responses provided by Edinburgh University:
[3]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

The responses provided by ACAS:
[4]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...

As you may be aware, ICO guidance advises that while confidentiality
clauses can be useful in helping to identify commercially sensitive
information, they should not be applied to an entire contract.
([5]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...)

Please review your response and, if the exemption is upheld, provide all
of the requested information not covered by the confidentiality clause.

Please also reconsider whether the public interest in maintaining the
exemption outweighs the public interest in its disclosure.

There is strong public interest in openness to enable the public to better
scrutinise the public monies spent and to enable members of the public to
engage with, and challenge you on, how you spend public money. You will be
aware there is strong public interest in Stonewall's influence on the
public sector and the related costs.

There are 3 areas of public interest you should consider in your review.

1) The strong case for openness and transparency in your dealings with
Stonewall, given the Equality Minister's call for all public sector
organisations to leave Stonewall and current discussion in Parliament &
the media.

2) The accountability for spending public money on advice from an
organisation that the Reindorf Review found has an erroneous understanding
of the law, basing advice, directions on policy and requirements on the
law as Stonewall would prefer it to be, rather than the law as it is.

3) Your Public Sector Equality Duty - withholding this information
obstructs your execution of your Public Sector Equality Duty including the
duty to advance equality of opportunity between people who share a
protected characteristic and those who do not and the duty to foster good
relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those
who do not. Withholding this information makes it difficult for members of
other protected characteristics to engage with your equality & diversity
activities and policies , and challenge you on them.

With this in mind, I would be grateful if you could review your response,
and, if the exemption is upheld, provide details of the public interest
test conducted around the decision.

It took 40 work days to answer my initial request so I hope to hear the
result of your reveiw more promptly.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on
the Internet at this address:
[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...

Yours,

Ermine Amies

For ease of reference, here is your response to my request:

1. Any application you made in 2019 or 2020 to be a “Stonewall Diversity
Champion” or to be included on Stonewall’s “Workplace Equality Index,”
including any attachments or appendices to those applications. Please
redact personal details if necessary.

Tate did not submit an application to the Stonewall Equality Index for
2020 (documents are submitted in the preceding year, in this case 2019),
or for 2021.

Membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme does not require
an application or submission.

2. Any feedback you received in 2019 or 2020 from Stonewall in relation to
either application or programme.

Please see the response above.

3. Any other communication you have received from Stonewall in 2019 or
2020 unless privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure (but if you
claim privilege or exemption in relation to any material, please say in
broad terms what the material is and the basis on which you claim to be
entitled to withhold it).

As noted above, Tate did not submit an application to Stonewal ’s
Workplace Equality Index in either 2019 or 2020. We confirm we that we do
hold a small amount of correspondence that we received over the period
2019-20. This includes non-specific newsletters and webinar invites, and
correspondence relating to the commercial aspects of the previous years.
For the purposes of this request, we have taken the generic communication
to be out of scope. Communications on commercial matters are withheld
under the exemptions provided for by Section 43 (2) of the Freedom of
Information Act. The relevant text is detailed in the appendix below
(Appendix A). Tate’s Freedom of Information Group recognises the public
interest in your request, but consider that the rights of both
communicating parties to conduct commercial discussions in private should
be maintained.

4. Full details of any equality impact assessment you carried out
connected with any of these applications (including any equality impact
assessment carried out prior to an earlier application of the same kind,
if no further assessment was done).

Tate’s membership of the Diversity Champions programme is a paid-for
service and did not require a EQIA.

5. Details of the total amount of money you paid to Stonewall (i) in 2019;
(i ) in 2020, whether or not as payment for goods or services.

[Answer is confusing but I think it is:] Stonewall Equality Diversity
Champions Membership 13/3/19 - £2,500.00

12/3/20 Stonewall Equality Diversity Champions Membership - £2,500.00

6. Whether you intend to continue your membership of any Stonewall scheme
in the future, and if so which.

We intend to renew Tate’s membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions
programme for 2021-22.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[7][FOI #724650 email]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[8]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:

[9]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please note that any information sent, received or held by Tate may be
disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Tate (Gallery) request email]
2. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...
3. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...
4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...
5. https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...
6. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/i...
7. mailto:[FOI #724650 email]
8. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
9. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Gadawodd Ermine Amies anodiad ()

Internal Review due by 23 July.

Jessica Clifford, Tate (Gallery)

1 Atodiad

Dear Ermine Amies,

 

With regard to your request for an internal review of our handling of your
FOI request, please see attached a letter from Jayne-Anne Gadhia, Chair of
Tate’s FOI Appeals. She has reviewed the case and is upholding Tate’s
response. Further detail can be found in the attached.

 

Kind regards,

 

Jessica Clifford

On behalf of the Freedom of Information Group

 

 

Please note that any information sent, received or held by Tate may be
disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000