Comparing Harrogate Council's FOI data with other similar councils

The request was partially successful.

Dear Harrogate Borough Council

On February 19, 2018, at a meeting of the Overview & Scrutiny Commission, the Council’s Legal & Governance department agreed that it would seek to obtain comparative data from other similar-sized councils in the region in relation to the way each processed Freedom of Information requests.

Councils would be asked to produce figures as to the number of FOI requests handled each year; together with the number that were successful and the number rejected. Also, the type of requests it received and how quickly and efficiently they were handled. The councils would also be asked whether they had any advice on how to make the FOI process more efficient and/or cost-effective.

This information was due to be produced for discussion at a future meeting of the Overview & Scrutiny Commission; the inference being that it would be held before the forthcoming local council elections on Thursday May 3, 2018.

I now understand that the scrutiny committee will be not discussing this matter before the local elections; and that after the elections the matter may be dropped altogether by the newly-formed scrutiny committee.

I am therefore requesting a copy of the dated letter that was sent to other councils with regard to their FOI schemes; and a summary of the feedback received so far.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Lilley

Rich Kemp, Harrogate Borough Council

Dear Mr Lilley

 

Thank you for your email which we received on 27/03/2018. We are treating
this as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act
2000. This means that —

 

o if we need more information about what you want, we will contact you
again as soon as we can; the twenty working days in which to give you
the information will start once we know exactly what you want
o if we do not hold the information, we will, if we can, transfer your
request to an authority who does hold it, and tell you what we have
done (please contact us immediately if you do not want us to do this);
otherwise, we will let you know that we do not hold the information
o if we hold the information and there is no reason to withhold it, we
will send it to you as soon as we can.  If there is likely to be a
delay for any reason, we will let you know
o if we believe that there is a good reason why the information should
not be disclosed, we will let you know as much as we can about how we
reached our decision

 

We will respond to your request promptly, and in any event, within the 20
working day limit as set out in s10 of the Act.

 

Regards

 

Rich Kemp

(Debt & Information Law)

Legal & Governance

Harrogate Borough Council

PO Box 787

Harrogate

HG1 9RW

 

tel: 01423 500600 (ext - 58602)

email:  [1][email address]

[2]www.harrogate.gov.uk

 

show quoted sections

Rich Kemp, Harrogate Borough Council

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Lilley

 

Thank you for your email requesting information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. Please find attached the original email
correspondence sent and summary of the findings received so far.

 

If you are not satisfied with the way your request has been handled,
please contact -  

 

Freedom of Information Officer, PO Box 787, Harrogate, HG1 9RW

 

or email [1][Harrogate Borough Council request email]

 

The Council has an internal appeal system.  If your complaint is about the
decision which has been made you will usually be entitled to have your
case reviewed by an officer from a department which has not been involved
in the decision previously.   

 

If, after their decision, you are still not happy, you may appeal to-  

 

The Information Commissioner

Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF

Tel: 0303 123 1113

website: [2]https://ico.org.uk/

 

Regards

 

Rich Kemp

(Debt & Information Law)

Legal & Governance

Harrogate Borough Council

PO Box 787

Harrogate

HG1 9RW

 

tel: 01423 500600 (ext - 58602)

email:  [3][email address]

[4]www.harrogate.gov.uk

 

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Kemp
I acknowledge Harrogate Borough Council’s response to my FOI request which I regret to say, I don’t find entirely satisfactory or indeed, particularly useful since the councils who responded to HBC’s circular appear to have simply provided statistics and, seemingly, not addressed the more substantive issues raised by Ms Venn in her email of February 28, 2018.
I find it rather astonishing that, apparently, not one single council provided you with a copy of their Internal Review process. Or a statement setting out how senior officers conducting these reviews remain impartial (or, as Ms Venn put it: remain impartiality).
Can you confirm please whether any council offered an explanation as to why they declined to provide you with a copy of their Internal Review process and/or a statement as to how impartiality is ensured?
You have indicated that the information supplied to me reflects the feedback you have received so far, but can you clarify please the total number of councils who were sent Ms Venn’s February 28 email; and whether you’re expecting to receive further responses?
Furthermore, in relation to Ms Venn’s questions concerning the department responsible for handling FOI requests at each of these different councils and whether they have a dedicated FOI officer, I should be grateful if you would provide actual figures in relation to the responses you received rather than referring rather vaguely to “the majority of respondents stated.”
Yours sincerely
Peter Lilley

Mark Codman, Harrogate Borough Council

Dear Mr Lilley,

 

I am responding to your e-mail sent to Mr Kemp. I would like to stress
that the information is in draft format at the moment and has not been
analysed in any detail as it is part of an on-going review and will be
published as part of this process.

 

I have reviewed the information again in response to your e-mail (see
below) please note this is not a detailed analysis just initial comments
at this time:

 

1.       Can you confirm please whether any council offered an explanation
as to why they declined to provide you with a copy of their Internal
Review process and/or a statement as to how impartiality is ensured?

 

·         I can confirm that no council offered an explanation as to why
they declined to provide a copy of their internal review process other
than from the information received it is implied that it is simply a
review undertaken by another officer/section and there is no documented
process as such.

·         I cannot really add anything to the original comment about
ensuring impartiality in that in general they are conducted by officers
not normally involved in the original request of more or equal seniority.
Comments included:

o   ‘The officer undertaking the internal review would not have had any
part in the original request’

o   ‘'Reviews are handled by our Monitoring Officer who does not get
involved in answering initial FOI request’

o   ‘These are reviewed by our legal team who do not deal with the
original request’

 

2.       You have indicated that the information supplied to me reflects
the feedback you have received so far, but can you clarify please the
total number of councils who were sent Ms Venn’s February 28 email; and
whether you’re expecting to receive further responses?

 

·         The councils that were contacted were all those where
information was provided on the previous e-mail (15 in total). These have
previously been identified as ‘nearest neighbour’ councils based on a
range of social‐economic indicators.

·         3 councils have not responded to date

·         I am following up further information requests as part of the
on-going review and expect further responses that will be publically
reported and published

 

3.       In relation to questions concerning the department responsible
for handling FOI requests at each of these different councils and whether
they have a dedicated FOI officer I should be grateful if you would
provide actual figures in relation to the responses you received rather
than referring rather vaguely to “the majority of respondents stated”

 

·         Actual figures:

o   3 councils submitted no response

o   8 had a nominated officer but further information is required as it is
clear that for many this is not the officers’ substantial/main role

o   3 did not have a dedicated officer

o   1 Further information is required

 

I hope  this addresses your queries.

 

Regards

 

 

Mark Codman

Scrutiny, Governance and Risk Manager

Legal and Governance

Harrogate Borough Council

PO Box 787

Harrogate

HG1 9RW

 

Tel - 01423 500600 ext 58595

[1][email address]

[2]www.harrogate.gov.uk

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Codman
Thank you for your response to the follow-up queries I raised with your colleague Rich Kemp.
I acknowledge the point you make; that this is still an on-going piece of work and you’re still awaiting responses from three councils.
It does seem strange though that several of the councils which have already responded appear to have provided you with incomplete information. Would it not have been logical for them to wait until they were able to provide you with all the answers in a single communication? Or perhaps it’s the case that they simply don’t intend to answer all your questions?
I’m also surprised at the choice of councils you have contacted. My understanding, based on having attended the Overview & Scrutiny Commission meeting on February 19, 2018, was that you would be contacting “neighbouring” councils which I took to mean that they would be based in Yorkshire or, at the very least, the north of England. Instead just one of the 15 councils you selected is situated within 100 miles of Harrogate; with some based as far afield as Sussex and Somerset.
I also thought the Scrutiny Commission’s principal reason for suggesting you approach other councils was in order to seek their “best practice” advise on handling FOI requests; which Harrogate Council could then potentially embrace so as to make its own FOI handling process more efficient and cost-effective. But Ms Venn appears to have refrained from posing this question in her email to the 15 councils dated February 28, 2018.
I would have thought that simply extracting comparative data from a motley collection of other councils without any comments, explanations or advice is neither particularly interesting - or useful.
Yours sincerely
Peter Lilley