Dear Mr. Morton,
Thank you for your request for an internal review. Please accept Council’s apologies
for not responding to your request for information in a timely fashion.
Your request asked for:
“
Can I please request a copy of the final report pertaining to the terms of Reference
contained within this Freedom of Information Act 2000 request. I understand that a
draft was completed in April 2015 and returned to Mr. Warren by senior officers of
Wirral Council for h to consider additional information. I am assuming that in the
intervening 16 months he has been able to complete this report.”
Wirral Council is unable to disclose a copy of the report and has relied on the
exemption contained within Section 36 of The Freedom of Information Act 2000 to
refuse your request. Section 36 can be relied on if in the reasonable view of the
qualified person, it is appropriate to do so. I am the qualified person for the Council in
my role as Monitoring Officer.
Your request is refused as I believe that disclosure would inhibit-
(i) the free and frank provision of advice, or
(ii) the free and frank exchange of views for the purpose of deliberation.
I have had regard to the guidance issued by the ICO, when reaching this opinion -
” Prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs”, version 2.
I consider that if the information requested were disclosed, then the content of
discussions by senior officers and other 3rd parties, concerning issues of appropriate
gravity would be fundamentally undermined. My opinion is that such discussions
would have been inhibited had those individuals not believed that their commentary
and opinions would be kept confidential.
Disclosure of the information contained within the report would lead to a less candid
exchange of view and ideas. The likelihood of prejudice is significant and weighty,
inhibiting the provision of advice and the free and frank exchange of
views. This may also impair the quality of decision making of the Council and have a
‘chilling effect’. Paragraph 49 of the guidance states “
If the issue in question is still
live, arguments about a chilling effect on those ongoing discussions are likely to be
most convincing”.
My opinion is that it is also relevant to have regard to the sensitivity of the
information in question and I am satisfied that the qualified exemption contained in
Section 36 (b) (i) and (ii) are engaged, having regard to the issues still being live and
of a sensitive nature.
Where the Council finds that the qualified exemption is engaged then it is
necessary to consider the test under s.2(2)(b),of FOIA, namely that “in
all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the
exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information”.
As the qualified person I have weighed these factors and believe that Public interest
factors against maintaining the exemption are:-
i.
Public interest in the promotion of transparency and accountability in
relation to the activities of public authorities
Public interest factors for maintaining the exemption are:-
i.
Reduction of the ‘chilling effect’ when matters of particular sensitivity
are being discussed
ii.
Reduces the likelihood of inhibition of future discussion in respect of
issues, which are still live and of a sensitive nature.
I consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public
interest in disclosing the information and I am therefore refusing your request for
information under Section 17 of FOIA on the basis that the exemptions contained in
Section 36 (2) (b )(i) and (ii) apply to the requested information.
You have the right to complain to the ICO if you are dissatisfied with this reply to
your request, please see contact details here
https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/
Yours sincerely and sent on behalf of
Surjit Tour
Head of Legal & Member Services and Monitoring Officer
Department of Transformation and Resources
Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council
Town Hall
Brighton Street
Wallasey
Wirral
CH44 8ED