Freedom of Information Team
Department of Health and Social Care
39 Victoria Street
London SW1H 0EU
www.gov.uk/dhsc
Mr David Osborn
By email to
: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
7 August 2024
Dear Mr Osborn
,
Freedom of Information Request Reference FOI-1518648
Thank you for your request dated 6 July to the Department of Health and Social Care
(DHSC), a copy of which can be found in the accompanying annex.
Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
This was a follow up to your original request of 17 February, to which we responded on 15
May (our ref: FOI-1497474), and a subsequent Internal Review of FOI-1497474 (our ref:
IR-1513267, dated 31 May).
DHSC holds the information you have requested relating to the PPE Clearance Board,
which is provided in the five documents attached.
Please note that some names and contact details have been redacted, as the personal
data of officials and staff below senior level is exempt from disclosure pursuant to section
40(2) of the FOIA. Section 40(2) provides for the protection of personal information which
would not otherwise be available in the public domain, as disclosing this information would
contravene data protection principles.
Further information has also been redacted under section 43(2) of the FOIA, which
exempts from the general duty to release information which would, or would be likely to,
prejudice the commercial interests of any entity, including the public authority holding the
information.
Section 43 is a qualified exemption and, as such, we are required to assess the public
interest in withholding this information against that of its release.
We recognise the general public interest in making information available in the interests of
greater transparency and openness, and a valid public interest in disclosing information
about services that are procured using public money. However, we also take into account
the fact that this information is commercially sensitive. Disclosure of certain information
may place a third party at a commercial disadvantage, which would discourage future
commercial partner relationships with DHSC, and consequently undermine DHSC’s ability
to fulfil its role in securing best value for money. Therefore, DHSC takes the view that, in
this case, the public interest lies in ensuring that this information is not disclosed.
A small number of redactions have also been made under section 23 (security matters),
and section 31 (law enforcement) of the FOIA.
Section 23 relates to information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security
matters. DHSC is applying this exemption as some of the information ‘relates’ to the
National Crime Agency (NCA). The NCA is one of the bodies listed in section 23(3) of the
FOIA.
Section 31 relates to Law Enforcement. We have made a small number of redactions
under section 31(1)(a)(b)(c) and (g) of the FOIA, which is where disclosure of information
may prejudice: a) the prevention or detection of crime; b) the apprehension or prosecution
of offenders; c) the administration of justice; and g) the exercise by any public authority of
its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2). These redactions have
been made to the document headed “Update the deals log: Daily PPE Clearance Process
Minutes and Actions”, and we have indicated in the margin of the document where
redactions have been made under this exemption, and where those redactions have been
applied, we also consider that information to be exempt under section 23 (security matters)
as referred to above.
Regarding our use of 31(1)(g), where section 31(2) is engaged, we are claiming the
following purposes:
a) ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law; and
b) ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper.
Section 31 is a qualified exemption and, as such, we are required to assess the public
interest in withholding this information against that of its release.
DHSC is aware that there is a clear public interest in disclosure of information and
recognises that openness in government may increase public trust in and engagement
with government. It also recognises a public interest in assuring the public that effective
arrangements are in place for the prevention and detection of crime.
However, our assessment is that the release of this information, at this time, may
undermine an ongoing investigation, and/or prejudice the outcome of any future court
proceedings. It may also be contrary to the public interest to disclose information which
would facilitate the commission of crime. Consequently, DHSC is satisfied that this
information remains exempt under section 31(1)(a)(b)(c) and (g) of the FOIA.
With reference to your query about whether the document referred to as “Update the deals
log: Daily PPE Clearance Process Minutes and Actions” originated from the Cabinet
Office, we can confirm that it did. In our response to FOI-1497474, we had misinterpreted
your request to be referring to the PPE Clearance Board (not the “DHSC PPE Decision
Making Committee”), and that is the reason we suggested that you may wish to contact
the Cabinet Office for minutes of any further meetings. We apologise for any confusion this
may have caused.
With regard to a letter you refer to from the ICO to DHSC on 1 September 2021 which
mentioned evidential requirements around section 43 (commercial interests), we do not
have that particular letter readily to hand, as we are in regular and constant
communication with the ICO, as you will understand. But we are obviously aware of the
requirements around the application of section 43, as with all the other exemptions.
If you are not satisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to appeal by
asking for an internal review. This should be sent to
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx or
to the address at the top of this letter and be submitted within two months of the date of
this letter.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communication.
If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may complain directly
to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Generally, the ICO cannot make a
decision unless you have already appealed our original response and received our internal
review decision. You should raise your concerns with the ICO within three months of your
last meaningful contact with us.
Guidance on contacting the ICO can be found at
https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us and
information about making a complaint can be found a
t https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint. Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Annex
From: David Osborn <xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2024 6:47 PM
To: FreedomofInformation <xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - DO-22 Request meetings of PPE Clearance
Cttee
Dear Department of Health and Social Care,
Dear DHSC
Thank you for your message of 6 June 2024 via WhatDoTheyKnow.com:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheykn
ow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%23incoming-
2674635&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40dhsc.gov.uk%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f
341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de8973a1c%7C1%7C0%7C638560293412186122
%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik
1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2B%2BBsIq1g%2FVnQzVRbfD
SXBKzwZWRTJWOHWJvaaPgTL0k%3D&reserved=0
In this message you invited me to submit a new request for the information I had asked for
in my request for an internal review but which you refused because it was unrelated to the
original FoI request. You said “Questions relating to material that was not relevant to your
request will not be addressed as part of the review; only to state that it was released
erroneously.”
The information you had “erroneously sent to me” were 5 pdf files relating to the approval
of purchase orders for PPE (including FFP3 respirators). They may be found here
:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheyk
now.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%23incoming-
2656427&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40dhsc.gov.uk%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f
341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de8973a1c%7C1%7C0%7C638560293412202595
%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik
1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=j4wtlQk8UB4ZqiZ4iy67i%2F6yCp
ZFv32XvG%2FnPKWASiQ%3D&reserved=0 .
There were a significant number of redactions in these documents and I had simply
requested that you “review the exemptions which you claimed under the public interest test
for redaction under section 43(2) and section 31(a)(b)(c) and (g) to ensure that they are
valid and lawful”. It is this which you refused to do as it was not related to my original
request (which was for minutes of the PPE Decision Making Committee). I fully
understand that you were within your rights to do that, and I am grateful to you for
suggesting that I might wish to submit a new request via the usual channels – which is the
purpose of this request.
This FoI request is therefore ask you to send me the following documents:
1) DHSC PPE Clearance Board Minutes Wednesday 1st July 2020
This was file you sent me
previously:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wh
atdotheyknow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%2Fresponse%2
F2656427%2Fattach%2F5%2F20200701%2520CB.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40d
hsc.gov.uk%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de89
73a1c%7C1%7C0%7C638560293412212841%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoi
MC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C
%7C&sdata=4sZU9Bnd5E3ew17ncc0vYK0Dq5%2BYw8AbVXcqzempDo8%3D&reserved
=0
2) 02/07/2020- PPE Board Meeting
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheykn
ow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%2Fresponse%2F2656427
%2Fattach%2F6%2F20200702%2520CB.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40dhsc.gov.uk
%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de8973a1c%7C
1%7C0%7C638560293412221264%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAw
MDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata
=J5pPTD%2BXwcM08k%2FMSugBjEgB8LN%2F3%2FDhZ9KKsQ6dUkY%3D&reserved=
0
3) DHSC PPE Clearance Board Minutes Friday 3rd July 2020
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheykn
ow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%2Fresponse%2F2656427
%2Fattach%2F7%2F20200703%2520CB.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40dhsc.gov.uk
%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de8973a1c%7C
1%7C0%7C638560293412228947%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAw
MDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata
=lGICySpCNLCN6inVW7inZ3r%2BfKAZZPIeDrxjoi5dWvk%3D&reserved=0
4) PPE Clearance Board meeting minutes 14/07/20
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheykn
ow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%2Fresponse%2F2656427
%2Fattach%2F8%2F20200714%2520CB%2520Redacted.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmai
l%40dhsc.gov.uk%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f08dc9f341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef
4de8973a1c%7C1%7C0%7C638560293412236569%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8ey
JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C
%7C%7C&sdata=xjEMraFMhju0cWGIu37kGp5wB4tnIfkIOnBJpEK1KIE%3D&reserved=0
5) Update the deals log : Daily PPE Clearance Process Minutes and Actions
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatdotheykn
ow.com%2Frequest%2Fdo_17_request_minutes_of_ppe_dec%2Fresponse%2F2656427
%2Fattach%2F4%2F6052020%252030062020%2520from%2520CO%2520redacted%25
2020240424.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Cdhmail%40dhsc.gov.uk%7C5401fa2bb440434a625f
08dc9f341f73%7C61278c3091a84c318c1fef4de8973a1c%7C1%7C0%7C6385602934122
43517%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RZcz7TeI4y7%2BkHGoBx9
hwbNZZ44z4lYCcA5HJW39uII%3D&reserved=0
Judging by the file name including “CO” the document appears to have been received by
you from the Cabinet Office. However I note that there is no evidence within the document
that the document did, in fact, originate from the Cabinet Office. This may have been in
some of the text which you redacted, but I would remind you that it is not within your power
to redact names of organisations associated with the data request. Please therefore
provide some confirmation, if only in the text of your letter of reply that the document did
originate from the Cabinet Office.
I am seeking this confirmation because, in a letter the Cabinet Office sent to me, they say
that they were not involved in matters pertaining to the PPE Decision Making Committee –
and thereby contradict your assertion that it is they who hold the PPE DMC minutes.
It should not take you long to send me this information since you have already sent it to
me. However, since you would not include issues relating to these documents in the
previous internal review you are forcing me through this route.
Although I do not need to signal my intentions in making this request, in fairness and by
way of full disclosure, my purpose is to ask the ICO review the redactions you have made
in order to verify for themselves that your redactions were in fact lawful and in line with
their guidance, since it appears that there have been issues with DHSC reliance on
exemptions in the past.
In this respect I refer to the letter sent to you by the ICO on 1 September 2021 and, in
particular, their mention of Section 43 (commercial interests) and the evidential
requirements that the ICO expects before this exemption can be used. If you no longer
have a copy of that letter, either I or the ICO will be able to provide it for you.
You will appreciate that I cannot refer this matter to them until we have been through the
internal review process. However, you have made it clear that this will not happen unless I
submit a fresh FoI request. This is it.
Yours faithfully,
David Osborn
