IPCC Review Editors' Reports

The request was refused by Department of Energy and Climate Change.

Dear Department of Energy and Climate Change,

I believe that the Review Editors' Reports for IPCC WGI AR5 should have been made available to or distributed to member government delegations at the WGI approval session in September. As you know the eventual release of those for AR4 led ultimately to the truth concerning the Glaciergate scandal and to the IAC Review of IPCC procedures that followed. They were certainly the trigger for FOIA requests and likely contributed to the motivation of the UEA leaker or hacker.

Although the AR5 RE reports are most unlikely to be as controversial as those for AR4 it is most likely that someone will find something controversial when they are finally released or leaked. If there is any matter of real public interest in them and their release is delayed it will add to public distrust of the IPCC process.

Accordingly I request in electronic form:

[1] Copies of all the Review Editors' Reports
[2] Copies of any recorded information held by DECC instructing it not to release the Review Editors' Reports
[3] Any recorded information held by DECC indicating a future date on which the Review Editors' Reports will be released.

Yours faithfully,

David Holland

FOI Requests,

DECC Ref: 13/1617

Dear Mr Holland

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 13 November 2013. Your request has been passed on to the appropriate official at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to deal with.

Your request is being dealt with under the terms of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and will be responded to at the latest by 11 December 2013.

If you have any queries about this email, please contact the information rights unit at BIS who have a shared service when dealing with requests for DECC. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

Kind regards,
Information Rights Unit

Security and Information Rights Unit | Department for Business, Innovation & Skills | [email address] | Victoria 3, 5th Floor, 1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H OET | www.bis.gov.uk | BIS have a shared service level agreement with DECC to process and advise on their FOI requests

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) is making a difference by supporting sustained growth and higher skills across the economy. BIS: working together for growth

show quoted sections

FOI Requests,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Holland
 
Please see the attached reply to your DECC EIR request ref 13/1617.
 
 
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Kind regards,
Information Rights Unit

Information Rights Unit (DECC Shared Service)
Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
Victoria 3, 5th Floor
1 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0ET
[1]www.gov.uk/bis
BIS has a shared service level agreement with DECC to process and advise
on their FOI/EIR requests
 
 
---------
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes
----------

References

Visible links
1. http://www.gov.uk/bis

David Holland left an annotation ()

In its letter DECC state that the Review Editors' Reports were in a restricted online database available to delegates at Stockholm. DECC suggests that Working Group One is a sovereign body whereas it an organ of the IPCC over which the UK and other governments have absolute control.

These Reports are contained in a 101 page PDF file which was available to other governments without such limitation. They comprise the only "quality assurance" documentation available to world governments which accepted the AR5 WGI Summary for Policymakers.

The expenses of several Review Editors were paid from the British public purse but DECC has no record of their work, or even if they turned up to do any. It is unlikely that they have been examined by any UK Minister. The UK has chosen to deliberately avoid possessing these highly relevant documents to avoid them being subject to the EIR and disclosed to the public.

It is a breach of the Aarhus Convention article 5(1)(a) and (b).

Dear Department of Energy and Climate Change,

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

I am asking you under regulation 11 of the EIR to reconsider your refusal to disclose any and all of the AR5 WGI Review Editors’ Reports.

First, I wish to request pdf copy of your letter of refusal reference 13/1617 dated 10 December 2013, as its quality when printed is unsatisfactory for my OCR software.

You state that these Reports were made available to you on a restricted basis. The British and other governments not Professor Stocker determine the rules of the IPCC and I believe delegates were free to download the 101 page 7 Mb file of Reports onto their laptops, as there simply was not the time at the Stockholm meeting to read them all. As the UK focal point for the IPCC, DECC could not be carrying out its duty of due diligence without at least seeing the Reports of the UK based Review Editors whose expenses were paid by DECC.

The University of Reading released all those for their employees without any fuss but the University of Cambridge is forcing my request to appeal in respect of Professor Peter Wadhams’ Report. I have good reason to believe that a member of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee is referred to in a less than flattering way. In view of the Committee’s ongoing enquiry into AR5 I believe it is overwhelmingly in the public interest that at least this Report is made public, preferably by an open release.

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 faithfully,

David Holland

FOI Requests,

DECC ref: IR/13/1617

Dear Mr Holland

Thank you for your request for an internal review which was received on 13 January 2014. Your request has been passed on to the appropriate official at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to deal with.

In line with the Information Commissioner's guidance, internal reviews should be responded to within 20 working days unless they are complex, in which case a response should be sent within 40 working days. Please be aware that this does not include weekends and bank holidays. The Department aims to respond to requests for internal reviews as quickly as possible. We hope to be in contact with you again shortly with a decision on your request. 
 
If you have any queries about this email, please contact the Information Rights Unit at BIS who have a shared service when dealing with requests for DECC. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

Kind regards,
Information Rights Unit

Information Rights Unit | Department for Business, Innovation & Skills | Victoria 3, 5th Floor, 1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0ET www.bis.gov.uk

show quoted sections

FOI Requests,

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Holland
 
Please see the reply to your Internal Review request (ref IR/13/1617).
 
 
You also asked for another copy of the reply to your original request.
 
 
If you have any queries about this email, please contact the Information
Rights Unit at BIS.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Kind regards,
Information Rights Unit

Information Rights Unit (DECC Shared Service)
Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
Victoria 3, 5th Floor
1 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0ET
[1]www.gov.uk/bis
 
 
---------
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes
----------

References

Visible links
1. http://www.gov.uk/bis

David Holland left an annotation ()

A redacted copy of only the 'final' reports of the AR5 Review Editors has now been released by IPCC WGI at its website. The name of a British MP and a TV personality have been redacted from the report of the Cambridge University Professor who was one of the Review Editors. Those following these matters will know the names.

The equally important interim reports of the IPCC AR5 WGI Review Editors (with the noble exception of those from the University of Reading) are still secret.

Once again DECC has made sure that it does not hold information that sceptics or deniers might want to examine.