Amount of alcohol purchased by 10 downing street
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
Please can you tell me how much has been spent on alcohol by the prime ministers office over the last 10 years, please can you break this down by year.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart
Thank you for your recent email, copied below. Unfortunately, we cannot
accept a request without a full and valid name. Please provide your full
name, if you wish to continue with this request. If we do not hear from
you within two months of the date of this email we will consider the
matter closed.
Regards
FOI Team
Room 405
70 Whitehall,
London, SW1A 2AS
Email: [1][Number 10 request email]
Dear FOI Team Mailbox,
Not sure why you need a persons name to request information.
Identity is not relevant and it is content to disclose the
information requested.
One of the underlying principles of the FOIA is that the identity of the applicant is not taken into account.
the default position of a public authority should be to accept the name provided by the applicant unless there is good reason to enquire further about the applicant’s name.
The applicants name in this case is not relevant to the request or any other request and the public authority have no reason to question it.
I have provided my name below.
Yours sincerely,
Stuart Ayre
Dear Stuart Ayre,
Please find attached our response to your recent Freedom of Information
request (reference FOI2021/16820).
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
Cabinet Office
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
Please can you tell me how much has been spent on alcohol by the prime ministers office during 2020.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Ayre
Our ref: FOI2021/18618
Dear Stuart Ayre,
Thank you for your request for information which was received on 15th
September. Your request is being handled under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 ('the Act').
The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore aim to reply at the latest by
13th October.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
Cabinet Office
Dear Stuart Ayre,
Please find attached our response to your recent Freedom of Information
request (reference FOI2021/18618).
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
Cabinet Office
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
You said:
"No receptions were held at which alcohol was served in 2020 and we do not
therefore hold information in relation to your request."
However I have found this news article that says:
"Inside Boris Johnson's exclusive Brexit bash with English sparkling wine but no champagne" - 31st January 2020.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/i...
Can you confirm how this event was funded? And who paid for the Englsih wine?
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Ayre
Dear Stuart Ayre,
Thank you for your request for an internal review (reference
IR2021/20045), which was prompted by our response to your request for
information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
We shall endeavour to complete the internal review and respond to you
within 20 working days.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.
Yours sincerely,
FOI Team
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
Please can you send me an update, 20 working days have now passed.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Ayre
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
Please can someone get back to me about this request, it's been 29 working days.
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Ayre
Dear Prime Minister's Office,
It's now been 51 days since The Prime Minster's office said "We shall endeavour to complete the internal review and respond to you within 20 working days."
The Prime Minsters Office is now 31 days late with this FOI request.
Since I made the request the national press have published details about several more alcoholic receptions held at Number 10.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/202...
"A source with knowledge of the 27 November gathering told the Guardian that Johnson came in and made a speech, mentioning how crowded it was in the room before leaving shortly afterwards to continue working. There were, the source added, “loads of leaving parties” and unplanned social events that took place in Downing Street throughout the second and third lockdowns."
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-numb...
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/f...
"Sources claimed at the No10 Christmas party officials glugged down bottles of wine and beer and had a Secret Santa and a festive quiz."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/b...
"Around “40 or 50” people were said to have been crammed “cheek by jowl” into a medium-sized room in Number 10 for each of the two events."
"There were also claims of a third, smaller gathering on November 13, the night Dominic Cummings walked out of No 10, "where they were all getting totally plastered". "
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/d...
"Downing Street's Christmas party rules - snogs, masks, and boozing with donors"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po...
Public Interest in this matter is now very high so I am wondering why the FOI have been so slow to reply.
Questions:
1. Why did the Number 10 FOI team come back with this response "No receptions were held at which alcohol was served in 2020 and we do not therefore hold information in relation to your request. "
Clearly there have been several "boozy" receptions at Number 10 during 2020 as detailed above including the Brexit reception when the UK left the EU and "English Wine" was consumed, so where did the FOI team obtain the information that there had been no receptions held at Number 10 during 2020? Who is authorised and responsible for this reply?
2. Who paid for the alcohol at all the receptions at Number 10 during 2020?
3. What is the total alcohol bill for all the receptions held at Number 10 during 2020?
Yours faithfully,
Stuart Ayre
Stuart left an annotation ()
The ICO have written to the Authority asking for the internal review process to be completed within 10 working days.
The letter from the ICO to the Cabinet Office is below:
Cabinet Office
Sent by email to: FOI-team@cabinetoffice.gov.uk
22 April 2022
Dear FOI Team,
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
Complaint from Stuart Ayre
Your reference: IR2021/20045
The Information Commissioner has received a complaint from the above named
individual who says that they have not received a decision regarding the internal
review they requested on 13 October 2021.
The Commissioner considers that a reasonable time for completing an internal
review is 20 working days after the date of the request for review.
The maximum amount of time taken should not be more than 40 working days.
This longer period may be justified if an internal review is complex, requires
consultation with third parties or there is a high volume of relevant information
covered by the request. There will only occasionally be legitimate reasons why
an extension longer than 40 working days is needed.
Internal reviews are discussed in the Section 45 Code of Practice.
Our Regulatory Action Policy is published on our website. Significant or repeated
unreasonable delays in dealing with internal reviews will be monitored by our
Enforcement team. In some instances regulatory action may be necessary.
Action
If it is the case that you have not issued an internal review decision to the
complainant, please do so within 10 working days as the review has already been
delayed.
If you have already responded to the complainant and believe that your review
should have been received, we recommend you contact them to confirm receipt,
if you have not already done so.
I have copied this correspondence to the complainant.
Yours sincerely,
Patrick Mitchell
Case Officer
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Nigel Jones left an annotation ()
Section 77(1) of the FOI Act makes it a criminal offence to block or conceal information with the intention of preventing it's disclosure.
I am guessing that is why they have gone silent on you. As their statement that no events took place in 2000 is clearly not true and evidence has been submitted to the police about this, i would make a complaint to the ICO if i was you.