ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force

The request was partially successful.

Dear Kent County Council,

In the past you have disclosed information (http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...). With this in mind can you please email me copies of all the Meetings Minutes held, of the ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force, over the last 12 month

Yours faithfully,

T Potter

Dear Kent County Council,

And the following information:

Copies of all the Meetings Minutes held, of the 'Joint Councils'(JC) (see notes below), over the past 12 months.

Yours faithfully,

T Potter

3 June 2010

Dear Kent County Council,

In the past you have disclosed information
(http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...).
With this in mind can you please email me copies of all the
Meetings Minutes held, of the ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force, over
the last 12 month

Yours faithfully,

T Potter

Note:

References to Joint Councils:

a. Joint Councils report:

Unaccompanied care leavers and asylum seekers report
http://www.kent.gov.uk/publications/coun...

b. Joint Council members:

Birmingham City Council

Hounslow Council

London Borough of Hillingdon

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

Kent County Council

Manchester City Council

Oxfordshire County Council

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council

West Sussex County Council

c. extract
"1.1 Joint Council Meeting
The joint council are doing two things:
• Raising concerns about the framework of legislation in regard to
UASC.
• Looking at practical impacts on Local Authorities, particularly
in terms of
financial risk"

http://www.islington.gov.uk/Downloadable...
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Potter
Thank you for your email below.
Kent County Council acknowledges your request for information under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. Assuming KCC holds this information, we
will endeavour to supply the data to you as soon as possible but no later
than 1st July 2010 (20 working days from date of receipt).

We will advise you as soon as possible if we do not hold this information
or if there are exemptions to be considered and/or any costs for providing
the information. Please quote our reference - FOI/10/0664 - in any
communication regarding this particular request.

Best regards

Corporate Access to Information Team, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 696265 or 01622 694261 - Fax: 01622 696075
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Potter

Thank you for your request for information made under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

With regards to your request for minutes of the Joint Council meetings we
have decided that disclosure would discourage member Authorities from free
and frank discussion, and so undermine the viability of this strategic
forum. Accordingly, it is the opinion of Kent County Council's Monitoring
Officer that this information should be withheld under Section 36 of the
Freedom of Information Act, as disclosure is likely to prejudice the
effective conduct of public affairs.

Section 36 requires consideration of where the public interest lies, and
it is KCC's opinion that it would not be in the best interests of the
public for this forum to be undermined by the reluctance of member
Authorities' representatives to engage in free and frank discussion.
Furthermore, it is felt that disclosure of data provided by individual
Authorities may be detrimental to community relations, particularly in
view of the vulnerable nature of UASC (unaccompanied minors) and other BME
groups.

We do not hold the minutes of the ADASS/ADCS Task Force meetings and would
suggest that you approach the ADCS at the following link:
[1]http://www.adcs.org.uk/index.html or Chris Spencer who chairs the
meetings at this email address: [email address] for this
information.

If you are unhappy with this response, and believe KCC has not complied
with legislation, please ask for a review by following our complaints
process; details can be found at this link
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...
on our website. Please quote reference FOI/10/0664.

If you still remain dissatisfied following an internal review, you can
appeal to the Information Commissioner, who oversees compliance with the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. Details of what you need to do, should
you wish to pursue this course of action, are available from the
Information Commissioner's website
[3]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom...

Best regards

Michelle Hunt
Access to Information Co-ordinator
Communication & Information Governance
Children, Families & Education Directorate
Kent County Council
Room 2.35, Sessions House
Maidstone, Kent, ME14 1XQ
External: 01622 696692
Internal: 7000 6692
Email: [email address]

_____________________________________________
From: Ms T Potter [[4]mailto:[FOI #36503 email]]
Sent: 03 June 2010 14:32
To: Freedom of Information - CED
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request - ADASS/ADCS Asylum
Task Force

Dear Kent County Council,

And the following information:

Copies of all the Meetings Minutes held, of the 'Joint
Councils'(JC) (see notes below), over the past 12 months.

Yours faithfully,

T Potter

3 June 2010

Dear Kent County Council,

In the past you have disclosed information
([5]http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...).
With this in mind can you please email me copies of all the
Meetings Minutes held, of the ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force, over
the last 12 month

Yours faithfully,

T Potter

Note:

References to Joint Councils:

a. Joint Councils report:

Unaccompanied care leavers and asylum seekers report
[6]http://www.kent.gov.uk/publications/coun...

b. Joint Council members:

Birmingham City Council

Hounslow Council

London Borough of Hillingdon

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham

Kent County Council

Manchester City Council

Oxfordshire County Council

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council

West Sussex County Council

c. extract
"1.1 Joint Council Meeting
The joint council are doing two things:
o Raising concerns about the framework of legislation in regard to
UASC.
o Looking at practical impacts on Local Authorities, particularly
in terms of
financial risk"

[7]http://www.islington.gov.uk/Downloadable...

[8]http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be
published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[9]http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about...

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #36503 email]

If you find WhatDoTheyKnow useful as an FOI officer, please ask
your web manager to suggest us on your organisation's FOI page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. http://www.adcs.org.uk/index.html
2. http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...
3. http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom...
4. mailto:[FOI #36503 email]
5. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...
6. http://www.kent.gov.uk/publications/coun
7. http://www.islington.gov.uk/Downloadable
8. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jo...
9. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about...

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

They cannot and will not answer because they are fully aware that they are all acting unlawfully. As far as protecting BME groups, this is bull!! BME groups are even more likely to be victimized by unlawful authority interventions into their private lives. Lets be clear about one thing, the governments of this world have an agenda of social engineering which has and end game of destroying families, they hide behind secrecy and their deeds are evil and malicious and vindictive. Some unscrupulous people employed by authorities abuse power and will do anything to justify the money they are paid even if it does mean they destroy others. Lucifarians are behind this, Satan Worshipers are running our country, and our world. They must be stopped for humanities sake.

Dear Kent County Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Kent County Council's handling of my FOI request 'ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force'.

I am writing as I consider your application of the exemptions you have referred to have been incorrectly applied in this instance. many other organisations like the LGA Asylum Taskforce, have fully disclosed like information.

I do consider it is in the Public interest for you to disclose the minutes of the Joint Council meetings. As minutes are often written in quite terse and opaque language, disclosure may have limited affects.

I consider many BME groups will be dismayed by your arguments for non disclosure, the issues they face can only be addressed by disclosing the data you claim will be detrimental to them.

You mention UASC would be badly affected by disclosure, I consider this argument is equally based upon a false premise. UASC and the Public need to be reassured that you are you are working in the interests of UASC and BME groups, your lack of transparency and non disclosure would suggest that KCC prefers secrecy when discussing how the Joint Councils organise and provide services to some of societies most vulnerable people.

The present Liberal and Conservation coalition government are pursuing a much more open data agenda and it appears that KCC is working contrary to Central government policy, direction and renewed drive for openness.

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

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Potter

Thank you for your email.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the Council's response to your request for
information, specifically the use of the prejudice to the effective
conduct of public affairs exemption under section 36 of the Freedom of
Information Act to withhold minutes of the "Joint Councils" meetings.

Given that all members of staff that are qualified to undertake internal
reviews under FOIA are subordinate to the Director of Law & Governance
(KCC's Monitoring Officer) who invoked this exemption, and are therefore
unable to conduct an independent and impartial review of your request, you
can appeal directly to the Information Commissioner. The Information
Commissioner will consider your complaint given these circumstances, even
though an internal review has not been conducted. Details of what you need
to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are available from
the Information Commissioner's website
[1]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom....

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

Dear Kent County Council,

Can I request that the Chief Executive conduct the internal review? Please also explain which part of the Freedom of Information Act states that an internal review cannot be conducted by a person sub ordinate to the Director of Law & Governance?

In this case it would seem KCC is seeking to constructively subvert the internal review process of the Act and hence act in a way that effectively negates KCC's duties to act transparently and in the Public interest without delay.

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

Kent County Council

9 July 2010

Dear Ms Potter

Thank you for your email.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the Council's response to your request for
information, specifically the use of the prejudice to the effective
conduct of public affairs exemption under section 36 of the Freedom of
Information Act to withhold minutes of the "Joint Councils" meetings.

Given that all members of staff that are qualified to undertake internal
reviews under FOIA are subordinate to the Director of Law & Governance
(KCC's Monitoring Officer) who invoked this exemption, and are therefore
unable to conduct an independent and impartial review of your request, you
can appeal directly to the Information Commissioner. The Information
Commissioner will consider your complaint given these circumstances, even
though an internal review has not been conducted. Details of what you need
to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are available from
the Information Commissioner's website
[1]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom....

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

Dear Kent County Council,

Can you please let me know when I can expect a reply to the correspondence below?

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

............................

Ms T Potter

9 July 2010

Dear Kent County Council,

Can I request that the Chief Executive conduct the internal review?
Please also explain which part of the Freedom of Information Act
states that an internal review cannot be conducted by a person sub
ordinate to the Director of Law & Governance?

In this case it would seem KCC is seeking to constructively subvert
the internal review process of the Act and hence act in a way that
effectively negates KCC's duties to act transparently and in the
Public interest without delay.

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

Kent County Council

9 July 2010

Dear Ms Potter

Thank you for your email.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the Council's response to your
request for
information, specifically the use of the prejudice to the effective
conduct of public affairs exemption under section 36 of the Freedom
of
Information Act to withhold minutes of the "Joint Councils"
meetings.

Given that all members of staff that are qualified to undertake
internal
reviews under FOIA are subordinate to the Director of Law &
Governance
(KCC's Monitoring Officer) who invoked this exemption, and are
therefore
unable to conduct an independent and impartial review of your
request, you
can appeal directly to the Information Commissioner. The
Information
Commissioner will consider your complaint given these
circumstances, even
though an internal review has not been conducted. Details of what
you need
to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are
available from
the Information Commissioner's website
[1]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom....

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's
Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48,
Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

Link to this | Send follow up

Dear Kent County Council,

On a FOI and more general basis can you advise who would investigate complaints made against your Director of Law & Governance? As a request for an FOI internal review is just another form of complaint.

Please provide a copy of your complaints procedure and your internal guidance on the conduct of FOI internal reviews.

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Potter

In the absence of the Director of Law & Governance (KCC's Monitoring
Officer), who is currently on annual leave, the Deputy Monitoring Officer,
namely the Head of Democratic Services & Local Leadership, is currently
reviewing your request for information, how it was handled and whether it
was appropriate to use section 36 to withhold the minutes of the Joint
Council meeting in its entirety. I understand that his investigations are
nearing conclusion and I anticipate that he will be in a position to reply
to you before the end of this week.

With regard to your other email, details of KCC's complaint processes are
already accessible to you via KCC's website
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have....

I should point out that KCC is in the process of revisiting the wording of
the literature both on the website and in leaflets to take into account
the fact that KCC has a Group Managing Director in place of a Chief
Executive.

A complaint about the Director of Law & Governance should be referred to
his line manager, the Group Managing Director.

KCC has not issued any formal guidance to officers on how to conduct
internal reviews relating to FOI complaints. Reviews are conducted by
either one of KCC's in-house solicitors or one of the five Directorate
Access to Information Coordinators depending on who made the original
decision to withhold information and/or the complexity of the case and/or
the legal arguments that need to be considered. Whoever deals defers to
the Information Commissioner's guidance in this regard.

[2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...
[3]http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...

I hope this is of assistance.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[4]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

Ms T Potter left an annotation ()

----- Original message -----
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 11:28:20 +0100
Subject: Kent County Council's refusal to do an FOI internal review

Dear ICO,

Is Kent County Council's refusal to do an FOI internal review legal?

"9 July 2010

Dear Ms Potter

Thank you for your email.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the Council's response to your request
for
information, specifically the use of the prejudice to the effective
conduct of public affairs exemption under section 36 of the Freedom of
Information Act to withhold minutes of the "Joint Councils" meetings.

Given that all members of staff that are qualified to undertake internal
reviews under FOIA are subordinate to the Director of Law & Governance
(KCC's Monitoring Officer) who invoked this exemption, and are therefore
unable to conduct an independent and impartial review of your request,
you
can appeal directly to the Information Commissioner. The Information
Commissioner will consider your complaint given these circumstances,
even
though an internal review has not been conducted. Details of what you
need
to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are available
from
the Information Commissioner's website"
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ad...

Ms T Potter

Caroline Dodge

Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department

When considering my request http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ad...
for an internal review please note the ICO lists the following public interest factors that would
encourage you to disclose the information requested:

• furthering the understanding of and participation in the public debate

of issues of the day. This factor would come into play if disclosure

would allow a more informed debate of issues under consideration by

the Government or a local authority.

• promoting accountability and transparency by public authorities for

decisions taken by them. Placing an obligation on authorities and

officials to provide reasoned explanations for decisions made will

improve the quality of decisions and administration.

• promoting accountability and transparency in the spending of public

money. The public interest is likely to be served, for instance in the

context of private sector delivery of public services, if the disclosure of

information ensures greater competition and better value for money

also assure the public of the personal probity of elected leaders and

officials.

• allowing individuals and companies to understand decisions made by

public authorities affecting their lives and, in some cases, assisting

individuals in challenging those decisions.

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

Kent County Council

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Potter

In the absence of the Director of Law & Governance (KCC's Monitoring
Officer), who is currently on annual leave, the Deputy Monitoring Officer,
namely the Head of Democratic Services & Local Leadership, has reviewed
your request for information, how it was handled and whether it was
appropriate to use section 36 to withhold the minutes of the Joint Council
meeting in its entirety.

In carrying out this review, the Head of Democratic Services and Local
Leadership has examined all relevant guidance issued by the Information
Commissioner's Office relating to the conduct of internal reviews and has
also obtained legal advice on the application of section 36 of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 allows a public
authority to withhold information if it deems that its disclosure would
prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. In particular, s.36 (2)
(b) states that "information...is exempt information if...disclosure of
the information would, or would be likely to, inhibit (i) the free and
frank provision of advice, or (ii) the free and frank exchange of views
for the purposes of deliberation". Section 36 (2) (c) states that
"information...is exempt information if...disclosure of the information
would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely to prejudice, the effective
conduct of public affairs.

The Joint Councils' Group was established by Kent County Council in
January 2007 and its membership is made up of elected Members and senior
officers from those authorities most affected by the impact of individuals
seeking asylum in the U.K. The group meets to discuss service provision,
accommodation, care and welfare issues. The group is well aware that the
issue of asylum is a hugely sensitive and controversial one for many
people in the U.K., not least of all because of the conflict between the
legal responsibilities of public authorities to asylum seekers and the
issue of the lack of central government funding for essential services for
this vulnerable client group. Public authorities are also well aware of
the tension that can be caused in communities where there are significant
numbers of individuals seeking asylum and the need for services to be
delivered responsibly and effectively.

The FOI Act Awareness Guidance No. 3, Version 2, issued on 1 March 2007
makes it clear that public interest factors that would encourage the
disclosure of information includes "furthering the understanding of and
participation in the public debate of issues of the day"; "promoting
accountability and transparency by public authorities for decisions taken
by them"; and "allowing individuals and companies to understand decisions
made by public authorities affecting their lives".

The Awareness Guidance No. 25, Version 2, issued in September 2008 also
states "the Information Commissioner's view is that there must be some
clear, specific and credible evidence that the substance or quality of
deliberations or advice would be materially altered for the worse by
disclosure under FOIA". The Commissioner also considers that the
"effective conduct" exemption should only be available in cases "where
disclosure would prejudice the public authority's ability to offer an
effective public service or to meet its wider objectives or purpose
(rather than simply to function) due to the disruption caused by the
disclosure and the diversion of resources in managing the impact of
disclosure".

The previous decision to withhold the minutes of the Joint Councils' Group
meeting on 25 February 2010 (the only such meeting that has taken place in
the last 12 months), relied on s.36 (2) (b) and (c), referred to above.
The decision was also based upon a genuine concern for the ongoing welfare
of a vulnerable client group. Specifically, there was a serious concern
that the disclosure of certain information relating to the cost of
providing services for unaccompanied asylum seeking children might be seen
as controversial by some in the local communities, particularly in those
parts of the country where community cohesion is or has in the past been
fragile.

However, having undertaken this review and, in particular, having
re-examined the content of the draft minutes of the Joint Councils' Group
meeting on 25 February 2010, it has been decided that it was inappropriate
to withhold the minutes in their entirety. Accordingly, the minutes are
now disclosed.

<<Action Notes25210.pdf>>
It should be noted, however, that this decision should not be regarded as
setting a precedent for the future disclosure of all minutes of the Joint
Councils' Group. Any future decision on disclosure, if requested, would
depend upon the precise content of future meeting minutes.

I trust that the provision of information and the above explanation now
satisfies your complaint. However, if you are still unhappy with the
decision, you can now appeal to the Information Commissioner, who
oversees compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Details of
what you need to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are
available from the Information Commissioner's website
[1]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom... or you can
phone the ICO Helpline on 08456 30 60 60.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

References

Visible links
1. http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom...
2. http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

Kent County Council

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Potter

My sincere apologies, in my original email below, I attached the wrong
file which was missing page 2...

<<Action Notes25210.pdf>>

For your information if you are not already aware, "AARE" is an acronym
for "All appeal routes exhausted".

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

_____________________________________________
From: Freedom of Information - CED
Sent: 06 August 2010 16:01
To: 'Ms T Potter'
Subject: FOI/10/0664 RESPONSE FOLLOWING INTERNAL REVIEW -
ADASS/ADCS Asylum Task Force
Importance: High

Dear Ms Potter

In the absence of the Director of Law & Governance (KCC's Monitoring
Officer), who is currently on annual leave, the Deputy Monitoring Officer,
namely the Head of Democratic Services & Local Leadership, has reviewed
your request for information, how it was handled and whether it was
appropriate to use section 36 to withhold the minutes of the Joint Council
meeting in its entirety.

In carrying out this review, the Head of Democratic Services and Local
Leadership has examined all relevant guidance issued by the Information
Commissioner's Office relating to the conduct of internal reviews and has
also obtained legal advice on the application of section 36 of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 allows a public
authority to withhold information if it deems that its disclosure would
prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. In particular, s.36 (2)
(b) states that "information...is exempt information if...disclosure of
the information would, or would be likely to, inhibit (i) the free and
frank provision of advice, or (ii) the free and frank exchange of views
for the purposes of deliberation". Section 36 (2) (c) states that
"information...is exempt information if...disclosure of the information
would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely to prejudice, the effective
conduct of public affairs.

The Joint Councils' Group was established by Kent County Council in
January 2007 and its membership is made up of elected Members and senior
officers from those authorities most affected by the impact of individuals
seeking asylum in the U.K. The group meets to discuss service provision,
accommodation, care and welfare issues. The group is well aware that the
issue of asylum is a hugely sensitive and controversial one for many
people in the U.K., not least of all because of the conflict between the
legal responsibilities of public authorities to asylum seekers and the
issue of the lack of central government funding for essential services for
this vulnerable client group. Public authorities are also well aware of
the tension that can be caused in communities where there are significant
numbers of individuals seeking asylum and the need for services to be
delivered responsibly and effectively.

The FOI Act Awareness Guidance No. 3, Version 2, issued on 1 March 2007
makes it clear that public interest factors that would encourage the
disclosure of information includes "furthering the understanding of and
participation in the public debate of issues of the day"; "promoting
accountability and transparency by public authorities for decisions taken
by them"; and "allowing individuals and companies to understand decisions
made by public authorities affecting their lives".

The Awareness Guidance No. 25, Version 2, issued in September 2008 also
states "the Information Commissioner's view is that there must be some
clear, specific and credible evidence that the substance or quality of
deliberations or advice would be materially altered for the worse by
disclosure under FOIA". The Commissioner also considers that the
"effective conduct" exemption should only be available in cases "where
disclosure would prejudice the public authority's ability to offer an
effective public service or to meet its wider objectives or purpose
(rather than simply to function) due to the disruption caused by the
disclosure and the diversion of resources in managing the impact of
disclosure".

The previous decision to withhold the minutes of the Joint Councils' Group
meeting on 25 February 2010 (the only such meeting that has taken place in
the last 12 months), relied on s.36 (2) (b) and (c), referred to above.
The decision was also based upon a genuine concern for the ongoing welfare
of a vulnerable client group. Specifically, there was a serious concern
that the disclosure of certain information relating to the cost of
providing services for unaccompanied asylum seeking children might be seen
as controversial by some in the local communities, particularly in those
parts of the country where community cohesion is or has in the past been
fragile.

However, having undertaken this review and, in particular, having
re-examined the content of the draft minutes of the Joint Councils' Group
meeting on 25 February 2010, it has been decided that it was inappropriate
to withhold the minutes in their entirety. Accordingly, the minutes are
now disclosed.

<< File: Action Notes25210.pdf >>
It should be noted, however, that this decision should not be regarded as
setting a precedent for the future disclosure of all minutes of the Joint
Councils' Group. Any future decision on disclosure, if requested, would
depend upon the precise content of future meeting minutes.

I trust that the provision of information and the above explanation now
satisfies your complaint. However, if you are still unhappy with the
decision, you can now appeal to the Information Commissioner, who
oversees compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Details of
what you need to do, should you wish to pursue this course of action, are
available from the Information Commissioner's website
[2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom... or you can
phone the ICO Helpline on 08456 30 60 60.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[3]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

References

Visible links
1. http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...
2. http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom...
3. http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

Dear Kent County Council,

You disclosure of the minutes requested is welcome. You mention that one of the core reasons for the withholding was relating to issues of cos. I consider that this reasoning was and is poor, as this sort of information is already in the Public domain, through thing like local authority committee reports and the widespread reporting of the costs involved, let alone the material Published by the UKBA, which includes details of the grant grants claims and funds allocated to names local authorities. Also, if a specific item in the Minutes could be exempted, all that was required was to redact such and release the rest of the information.

"Specifically, there was a serious concern
that the disclosure of certain information relating to the cost of
providing services for unaccompanied asylum seeking children might be seen
as controversial by some in the local communities, particularly in those
parts of the country where community cohesion is or has in the past been
fragile."

Yours faithfully,

Ms T Potter

p cialfi left an annotation ()

There has been sufficient time elapsed to ask for an update for the minutes of all meetings since the last request.
The arguments provided for non-disclosure are not valid.
Therefore, with the new request, should the requestee still refuse to provide the information required, the services of the ICO can be engaged.