Room 405
xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
70 Whitehall
www.cabinet office.gov.uk
London, SW1A 2AS
Paul Mil inder
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
FOI Reference: FOI2021/06921
26/04/2021
Dear Paul Mil inder
I refer to your request where you asked:
”On 19th February 2021 I wrote to Lord True, Lord Agnew, Lord True, Minister Gove, Minister
Skul y and other Ministers via the Ministerial Correspondence email and their private email
addresses to address issues of insolvency and judicial corruption. I wrote also to Minister
Cal anan of the Insolvency Service and other Ministers at BEIS.
I wrote in respect of the Ministerial Briefing Report of that date detailing:
"The matters present wide ranging public interest issues, demonstrating that in the UK one
cannot rely on the terms of a completed contract to gain restitution in the courts in my own case
and in both cases, that both the justice system and the Insolvency Service are rotten to the core
with corrupt practices designed to defraud, conceal and asset strip".
"I am asking that fol owing our Zoom cal , you al raise this document in the House of Lords.
This outrageous corruption under the façade of “justice” and insolvency has been going on for
too long. Political interference is the main driver of this systemic corruption and inter-agency
col usion".
No Minister, nor their representatives attended the Zoom cal and absolutely no response to my
concise 22-page report (with the table of contents for ease in navigation) was provided. I list
however, the number of times the email and report was read by the various Ministers:
xxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Lord Agnew) - Scot Young estate & Times article:
Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency col usion: Last read: 11:56, Mar 24
Read: 43 times
____________
xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Michael Gove) Ministers concealing indictable
offences & fraud against creditors - The intel report: Last read: 16:09, Mar 18
- Read: 10 times
____________
xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Lord True) - Zoom meeting 12PM - 26/02/2021 - reminder:
Last read: 11:04, Feb 26
Read: 1 time
____________
xxxxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx (Minister Zahawi) - Request for Zoom conference - P. Mil inder
/ A. Stansfeld / M. Young / K. Hol inrake / BEIS & Cabinet Office Ministers: Last read:
13:42, Mar 4
Read: 26 times
____________
xxxxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx (Minister Zahawi) - Scot Young estate & Times article:
Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency col usion: Last read: 13:42, Mar 4
- Read: 43 times
____________
xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Minister Lopez) - Scot Young estate & Times article:
Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency col usion Last read: 9:30, Mar 2 -
Read: 8 times
____________
Minister.Cal xxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx - (Minister Cal anan) - Scot Young estate & Times article:
Insolvency firms put under investigation - Inter agency col usion Last read: 2.02, Feb 22,
Read: 57 times
____________
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Minister Mordaunt) - Zoom meeting 12PM -
26/02/2021 - reminder Last read: 13:08, Mar 1 -
Read: 4 times
____________
psamandamil xxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Minister Mil ing) - Ministers concealing indictable
offences & fraud against creditors - The intel report 13:55, Feb 26
Read: 1 time
____________
xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx - (Minister Lopez) - Request for Zoom conference - P.
Mil inder / A. Stansfeld / M. Young / K. Hol inrake / BEIS & Cabinet Office Ministers: Last read:
11:22, Feb 24
Read 4 times
____________
STATUTORY DUTIES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST:
Al ministers are required, under section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to "uphold
the continued independence of the judiciary." The Lord Chancel or has an additional duty,
expressed in the oath of office, to "defend" that independence. This defence includes preventing
undue Government influence on judicial decisions (including undue ministerial criticism of
judicial decisions), ensuring adequate resources for the judiciary to exercise their functions and
having regard to the public interest.
It is undue political interference, by the Law Ministers of the Attorney General’s Office, the Lord
Chief Justice and the Lord Chancel or himself who are driving this judicial corruption.
REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT / DATA PROTECTION ACT
2018
1. We request to inspect al internal correspondences between officials and al Government
departments in respect of that ministerial briefing report and The Times article referred to.
2. We request to see al instructions given in respect of the Ministerial Briefing Report and
evidence of al action taken by the Cabinet Office and al replies in respect of the issues raised
of judicial corruption and inter-agency col usion therein raised.
3. We request to inspect al documentation to establish what the Cabinet Office and its
ministers are doing in the national public interest to perform on their statutory duties.
4. The scope of the request is from 12th February 2021 until 25th March 2021 and we
request to inspect al information, in whichever form such information is available, including any
oral recordings or handwritten notes, throughout that period in relation to the matters raised.
5. We request to inspect each and every single correspondence between ministers and
officials within the Cabinet Office and BEIS to identify whether in fact ministers are performing
on their duties under section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act.
We have substantive reason to believe that ministers have adopted the “doctrine of wil ful
blindness”. In doing so they are in breach of their duties and their oaths in office by concealing
corruption driven by undue political interference (acting contrary to the law).
We ask that you observe the statutory timeframe for delivering on this request and that we are
aware that there may be a charge for compiling this information. Please confirm what that fee is
if there is and we would be happy to disburse it at once on account.
Thank you and we look forward to hearing from you.”
I must inform you that the Cabinet Office is unable to comply with your request. Section 12 of
the Freedom of Information Act relieves public authorities of the duty to comply with a request
for information if the cost of dealing with it would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate
limit has been specified in regulations and for central Government this is set at £600. This
represents the estimated cost of one person spending 3.5 working days in determining whether
the Department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting it.
The reason that your request exceeds the cost limit is that relevant information could be
contained in very many electronic files across. Searching al those that might contain relevant
information to determine whether the Cabinet Office holds any information relevant to your
request wil exceed the appropriate limit laid down in the regulations. If you wish, you may refine
your request in order to bring the cost of determining whether the Cabinet Office holds relevant
information, locating, retrieving and extracting it, below the appropriate limit. The period covered
by your request is significant, and relates to a number of Ministers. One way to refine your
request would be to narrow the period it covers, or to reduce the number of Ministers within
scope of your request, but even a shorter period would require us to search many files and may
not be sufficient, on its own, to make it possible for us to comply with your request within the
appropriate limit.
I must inform you that if the Cabinet Office does hold any information, it may be subject to one
of more of the exemptions contained in the Freedom of Information Act.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact the FOI Team quoting the reference
number above.
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request or wish
to request an internal review, you should write to:
Rachel Anderson
Head of Freedom of Information
Cabinet Office
70 Whitehall
London
SW1A 2AS
email: xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
You should note that the Cabinet Office wil not normal y accept an application for
internal review if it is received more than two months after the date that the reply was
issued. If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may apply directly
to the Information Commissioner for a decision. General y, the Commissioner cannot make a
decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by Cabinet Office. The
Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely
FOI Team
Cabinet Office
