Dear The Tate Gallery,
I refer to http://liberatetate.wordpress.com/2011/1... and in particular the following extract:
"The last decision to extend BP’s sponsorship (to 2012) was taken in 2006. A Freedom of Information Act request reveals the decision was “taken by members of the senior management team”. It is not known why what had become such a contentious relationship was continued without a decision at Board level."
Please assist me with my enquiries into your activities by providing copies of the following:
1) minutes, notes and all other records of any meetings/discussions where BP sponsorship was discussed by "senior management" leading up to the 2006 decision.
2) ditto for Board discussions. In particular any reasoning behind leaving such an important decision to people deeply entwined with a sponsor which is and was then the cause of reputational damage to Tate. I am aware of the "Information has been exempted under Section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000" minutes at http://www.tate.org.uk/about/governancef... but I could not find anything in the 2006 minutes.
3) copies of any guidance given by the Board to "senior management" prior to this decision.
I also refer to http://liberatetate.wordpress.com/2011/1... and in particular the following extract:
"Both the Trustees as a Board but also the Trustees through their Ethics Committee, which was instituted about four years ago, have looked very carefully at the question."
4) copies of any reports, guidance, minutes, notes and all other records of any meetings by the Ethics Committee/Board on the issue of taking oil money.
For example, your minutes for May 2010 reveal that "Trustees were updated on the Ethics Committee meeting, at which corporate sponsorship had been discussed." What was that update?
Please note that "replies" which involve attachments in proprietary file formats are not acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text format will be deemed to be a refusal to answer. It may be that copies of some documents cannot be provided in plain text form, in which case Accrobat format will be acceptable.
Thank you for your request for information. Your request (our ref: 351)
was received on the 15th December 2011. It will be dealt with under the
terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and we will send you a
response within 20 working days.
If you have any queries about this email, please contact me.
On Behalf of Tate's Freedom of Information Group
Dear Mr Hansen
Request for Information under Freedom of Information Act (Our Reference
Thank you very much for your request for information which we received on
15 December 2011. You should have already received confirmation of your
In order that we might most usefully comply with your request for
information, I am writing to request clarification on one point.
In your request you outline four areas. In the fourth area, where you ask
for "copies of any reports, guidance, minutes, notes and other records of
any meetings by the Ethics Committee / Board on the issue of taking oil
money", you have not specified the time period for which you would like
this information. For the previous three areas of your request you refer
specifically to such documents as they relate to the 2006 decision to
renew sponsorship with BP. Would you also like for the fourth area of
your request to relate specifically to this decision? If not, could I ask
you please to specify for which time period you would like this
Many thanks for your assistance.
Masina Malepeai Frost
On Behalf of the Tate FOI Group
Masina Malepeai Frost
Email: [email address]
Direct Line: +44 (0) 20 7887 8881
Mobile: +44 (0) 79 7765 9166
Dear Masina Frost,
From the 2006 decision to the middle of December 2011 please.
Dear Mr Hansen
Re: Request for Information under Freedom of Information Act (Our Reference 351)
Thank your for your email clarifying your request.
We will reply to your request by 31 January 2012.
On Behalf of Tate FOI Group
Dear David Hansen
I am writing to let you know that we will be unable to respond to your
request (our ref: 351, as outlined below) made under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 within 20 working days.
This is because Tate is considering the application of a qualified
exemption in relation to your request i.e. an exemption that is subject to
a public interest test. In cases where a public authority is considering
the application of a qualified exemption the FOIA requires the authority
to reach its decision 'within such time as is reasonable in the
Tate is considering the application of exemptions under Section 36 of
FOIA, which provides that information is exempt information if, in the
reasonable opinion of a qualified person, disclosure of this information
would, or would be likely to, prejudice the effective conduct of public
affairs, and under Section 43(2) of FOIA, which provides that information
is exempt information if its disclosure would, or would be likely to,
prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public
authority holding it).
The original 20 working days were calculated from your clarification
response below, and would therefore have given a deadline of 3 February.
Due to a number of coincident requests requiring us to consider the public
interest test, we are unfortunately unable to consider the public interest
test for your request within this 20 working day framework. We estimate
that we will be able to respond to your request by 17 February 2012 i.e.
after a further 10 working days and will contact you again if there is any
If you have any queries about this email please do not hesitate to contact
On behalf of Tate Freedom of Information Group
Dear Mr Hansen
Please find attached two PDFs which constitute the response to your
Freedom of Information request, our reference 351.
On behalf of Tate FOI Group
<<20120214 FOI 351 Response SENT.pdf>> <<FOI 351 Material Released.pdf>>
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