committee meetings since January 2013
Angus Files made this Freedom of Information request to The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation
This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.
Dear The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation,
a FOIA to the JCVI asking for the number of
times during committee meetings since January 2013 a vote has been taken
in the forum and what were those occasions ie what was the product under
We acknowledge receipt of your email and request for information, which
will be treated as a request for information under statutory access
Please note that requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the
Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) will receive a response
within 20 working days from the day following the date of receipt of your
If the request is for your personal data (i.e. a Subject Access Request)
under the Data Protection Act, then we will respond within 40 calendar
Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
Tel: 020 8327 6920
www.gov.uk/phe Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk
Dear Mr Files
Please find attached Public Health England's response to your request for information.
Freedom of Information Officer
Your ref: 17/01/lh/519
Dear Freedom of Information Officer
Thank you for providing me with a response to the above referenced FOIA request on 12th February 2016. I note you have advised that.....
"Since January 2013 no minute of any JCVI meeting records a formal vote being held
by the Committee."
My request however, did not refer to "formal" votes being taken at the JCVI meetings. I requested details of any votes which had been taken in the course of JCVI meetings since January 2013. The Minutes you have directed me to suggest that on one occasion at least, a vote has taken place.
On Wednesday 6th February 2013 the members Declaration of Interests from page 11 onwards, identify 7 items from the agenda where decisions were taken as to whether or not members were permitted to vote in respect of each item. Of 36 declarations in total, all were permitted to take part in the discussion and 31 were permitted to vote whilst 5 were not.
"IV. Report from the JCVI travel sub-committee" had 5 members declare interests but all were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote"
"V. Update on prenatal pertussis immunisation programme" had five members declare interests all of whom were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote"
"VI. Meningococcal Green Book chapter" had five members declare interests, of which three were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote" a further two members were "able to participate in the discussion but not to vote"
"VII. Shingles Green Book chapter" had four members with declared interests three of whom were "participate in the discussion and to vote" and one who was" able to participate in the discussion but not to vote"
"VIII. Rotavirus Green Book Chapter" had five declarations of interest and all were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote"
"IX. Pneumococcal vaccination statement" had five declarations of interests from members who had links to "companies who manufacture and supply pneumococcal vaccines" but who were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote"
Item 11 and 12
"XI. Influenza vaccination pilot studies" and "XII. Egg allergy and influenza vaccination" had seven members declare interests five of whom were able to "participate in the discussion and to vote" and two were "able to participate in the discussion but not to vote"
These declarations suggest that irrespective of the fact that no "formal" record exists in the Minutes of votes having been taken in the JCVI committee rooms, that voting situations are occurring with some members being permitted to vote in respect of individual items, where others are not.
Furthermore the "JCVI position statement on use of Bexsero® meningococcal B vaccine in the UK" of March 2014 includes the fact that the committee "agreed" on two occasions................
"that the vaccine was likely to be effective in preventing a proportion of cases of IMD,..........."
".............that a 2+1 schedule
would be the preferred schedule for a UK programme".
Before the committee can reach agreement in this way, it surely follows that some method of guaging members support (or otherwise) is being employed to reach a consensus of opinion. From the information contained in the declarations of members interests with repeated reference to a voting situation it strongly suggests that decisions are being made in respect of individual items with a vote and I would be grateful if you would reconsider my FOIA request.
Could you please advise whether or not you wish me to submit this as an application for an Internal Review.
Dear Mr Files
Please find attached JCVI's response to your request for information.
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