Documents Supporting Maria Caulfield’s 23 May 2022 Statement on North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust

Date: Tuesday 25 March 2025

Subject: Freedom of Information Request – Documents Supporting Maria Caulfield’s 23 May 2022 Statement on the North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust

Dear DHSC FOI Team,

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I request access to all documents held by the Department of Health and Social Care that were used to inform or support Maria Caulfield’s statement in the House of Commons on 23 May 2022 (Hansard, https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/20...).

During the North East Ambulance Service (NEAS) debate, in response to Chris Bryant MP’s question about whether providing false information to a coroner should be investigated by police, Caulfield stated: “I reassure the hon. Gentleman that the police have investigated and that they did not find evidence of that.”

Specifically, I seek:

Briefing notes, memoranda, or ministerial submissions prepared for Maria Caulfield between 1 January 2022 and 23 May 2022 relating to the Northumbria Police investigation into NEAS’s coronial reporting practices.

Correspondence between DHSC and Northumbria Police, NEAS, or other relevant bodies (e.g., coroners, regulators) from the same period concerning this investigation or its findings.

Any internal DHSC records (e.g., emails, meeting minutes) from the same period that reference the police investigation’s outcome as cited by Caulfield.

This request is prompted by evidence contradicting her statement, namely, a Northumbria Police FOI response (24 August 2023) confirming a crime of “perverting the course of justice” was recorded in 2020, thus raising questions about the basis of her claim. I aim to clarify what information the DHSC provided her, given the public interest in NEAS’s actions linked to patient deaths and suppressed reports.

Please confirm receipt of this request and provide the information within 20 working days, as required by FOIA. . Should any exemptions apply, I request a detailed explanation and partial disclosure where possible.

If costs exceed the FOIA limit, please advise how I can refine the request.

Yours faithfully,

Paul Calvert

Date: 25th April 2025

Subject: Request for Internal Review - FOI-1595775 and FOI-1596058

Dear Freedom of Information Team,

I am writing to request an internal review of your response dated 24 April 2025 to my Freedom of Information requests (references FOI-1595775 and FOI-1596058), submitted on 25 March 2025. I am dissatisfied with the decision to aggregate the two requests and the refusal to provide information under Section 12egree(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Below, I outline my concerns:

Incorrect Aggregation of Requests

I believe the aggregation of FOI-1595775 and FOI-1596058 was inappropriate. The requests are not for "the same or similar information" as required by regulations 5(1) and 5(2) of the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004. FOI-1595775 seeks information about the Department of Health and Social Care's (DHSC) decision to appoint NHS England to lead the North East Ambulance Service (NEAS) review, including due diligence and whistleblower concerns from July 2021 to August 2022.

In contrast, FOI-1596058 requests documents supporting Maria Caulfield’s 23 May 2022 statement about a Northumbria Police investigation into NEAS’s coronial reporting practices, covering January 2022 to May 2022. These requests address distinct events (a decision-making process vs. a ministerial statement), different time periods, and separate issues (NHS England’s role vs. police investigation outcomes). To illustrate their distinct nature, I have submitted a refined FOI request for FOI-1596058, narrowed to documents from 23 May 2022, which clearly differs in scope and focus from FOI-1595775. I request that you review whether aggregation was justified and consider handling the requests separately.

Excessive Cost Estimate

The response states that a search for FOI-1595775 identified 8,196 electronic files, with a review cost exceeding £10,000. This seems disproportionate for a request targeting specific correspondence and due diligence documents. I request clarification on the search methodology, including the keywords, systems, and scope used, and why such a large number of files were identified. Additionally, no search was conducted for FOI-1596058, which appears narrower in scope. Please explain why the DHSC did not assess the cost of complying with FOI-1596058 independently before aggregating.

Failure to Provide Partial Information

Given the public interest in transparency regarding NEAS’s failings, patient deaths, and the accuracy of ministerial statements, I am concerned that the DHSC did not consider providing partial information (e.g., key documents like terms of reference or briefing notes) or conducting a more targeted search. Please review whether the DHSC fulfilled its duty under Section 16 of the FOIA to assist me in refining the requests.

Specific Advice for Refinement

Your response suggested refining the requests but provided generic advice (e.g., narrowing the time period or specifying search terms). I request more specific guidance under Section 16, tailored to each request, to help me submit revised requests that fall within the cost limit without risking further aggregation.

The information sought is of significant public interest, as it relates to accountability for NEAS’s handling of patient deaths, whistleblower concerns, potential conflicts of interest in NHS England’s appointment, and the accuracy of a ministerial statement. I urge you to reconsider the aggregation and explore ways to provide at least some of the requested information.

Please confirm receipt of this internal review request and provide a response within the statutory timeframe. If possible, please provide specific advice on refining each request separately to avoid future aggregation.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

Yours faithfully,

Paul Calvert