Email correspondence between Leigh Academies Trust and Dominic Herrington

The request was partially successful.

Charles Marshall

Dear Department for Education,

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I am writing to request that you provide me with electronic copies of all email correspondence between Leigh Academies Trust and Dominic Herrington, Regional Schools Commissioner for South-East England and South London, on the subject of the academisation of Horsmonden and Paddock Wood Primary schools between 1st September 2018 and the date that the information in this request is sent to me (so, for example, if you were to provide the requested information to me on, say, 10th May, then the date parameters would be 1st September 2018 to 10th May).

I look forward to receiving these at your very earliest convenience, but not later than Tuesday 4th June 2019, that being 20 working days from the date of this email.

Yours faithfully,

Charles Marshall

MINISTERS, Department for Education

1 Attachment

Thank you for contacting the Department for Education, you will usually
receive a reply within 15 working days.

You can find out how the department processes your personal information by
reading our [1]Privacy Notice.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...

MINISTERS, Department for Education

1 Attachment

Thank you for contacting the Department for Education, you will usually
receive a reply within 15 working days.

You can find out how the department processes your personal information by
reading our [1]Privacy Notice.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...

ACCOUNT, Unmonitored, Department for Education

Dear Charles,

 

Thank you for your request for information, reference number 2019-0017593,
which was received on 07 May 2019. You requested “electronic copies of all
e-mail correspondence between Leigh Academies Trust and Dominic
Herrington, Regional Schools Commissioner for South East England South
London, on the subject of academisation of Horsmonden and Paddock Wood
Primary schools between 1 September 2018 and the date that the information
in this request is sent to me” I am dealing with your request under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”).

 

The Department holds the information you have requested.  However, I
consider that the following exemption(s) applies to your request:

 

1.     Section 36 (2) (b) (ii) and Section 36 (2) (c) – Prejudice to
effective conduct of public affairs.

 

The Act obliges the Department to respond to requests promptly, and in any
case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request.  However,
where a Section 36 exemption is applicable, the Department must consider
whether the public interest lies in disclosing or withholding the
information.  In these circumstances, the Act allows the time for response
to be longer than 20 working days.

 

In this case, the Department estimates that it will take an additional 20
days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. 
We anticipate that you will receive a full response by 3 July 2019.  If it
appears that it will take longer than this to reach a conclusion, we will
keep you informed.

 

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me.  Please
remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications. 

 

If you are unhappy with the way your request has been handled, you should
make a complaint to the Department by writing to me within two calendar
months of the date of this letter. Your complaint will be considered by an
independent review panel, which were not involved in the original
consideration of your request. 

 

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint to the
Department, you may then contact the Information Commissioner’s Office. 

 

Yours sincerely

 

Neville Bolton

Office of the Regional School Commissioner for South East and South London

 

 

ACCOUNT, Unmonitored, Department for Education

5 Attachments

Dear Charles,

Thank you for your request for information. I refer to your request which
was received on 7 May 2019 . I have dealt with your request under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”). You requested a ‘electronic
copies of all e-mail correspondence between Leigh Academies Trust and
Dominic Herrington, Regional Schools Commissioner for South East England
South London, on the subject of academisation of Horsmonden and Paddock
Wood Primary schools between 1 September 2018 and the date that the
information in this request is sent to me’ I am dealing with your request
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”).

 

A copy of the information you requested is enclosed, some of the
information has been redacted and is being withheld as set out below.

 

1.     Section 36 - Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs

Under Section 36(the Department is not required to provide information, if
in the reasonable opinion of a qualified person (a Minister in the case of
Government departments) disclosure of the information under the Act would
be likely to, inhibit:

-        the free and frank provisions of advice   - 36(2)(b)(i)

-        the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of
deliberation – 36(2)(b)(ii) and

-        would be likely to otherwise to prejudice the effective conduct
of public affairs – 36(2)(c).

In relation to your request, a Minister has decided that, in their
reasonable opinion, disclosure of these conversations and communications
is likely to have this prejudicial effect and therefore the exemption in
Section 36 applies.

As Section 36 is a qualified exemption, a public interest test has been
carried out. In doing so, we have considered the following factors:

* It is in the public interest for there to be transparency in the way
officials carry out their functions. Releasing this information would
enable greater insight into academy conversions.
* Conversely, there is a public interest in maintaining levels of trust
and confidence between the Department and stakeholders. Releasing this
information would likely restrict the openness and frankness with
which officials advise stakeholders in the future. This could hinder
the ability of the officials to make informed decisions, as they may
not be fully appraised of all the key information about the issue.
* Publication of this information would also likely have the chilling
effect protected under s.36 (2) (b) (i) and (ii) as officials would be
less likely to offer advice or exchange views on difficult matters.
This would negatively affect the ability of officials to carry out
their roles effectively and thus their relationships with important
stakeholders. 

2.  Section 40 – Personal information

The enclosed includes a small number of redactions to which we
are applying section 40(2) (personal data). Personal data is that which
relates to a living individual who can be identified from that data, or
from that data and other information which is likely to be in, or to come
into, the possession of the requestor.  Disclosure of this information
would contravene a number of the data protection principles in the General
Data Protection Regulations/Data Protection Act 2018, and would be
regarded as ‘unfair’.  By that, we mean the likely expectations of the
data subject that his or her information would not be disclosed to others
and the effect which disclosure would have on the data subject.  Section
40(2) is an absolute exemption and is not subject to the public interest
test.

The arguments for and against release have been considered and we have
determined in this case that the balance of public interest falls in
favour of withholding the information. This is primarily because
disclosure would likely hinder the free and frank exchange of views or
advice and the effective conduct of affairs.

 

In addition to the redacted e-mails, I have enclosed two letters, most of
which have been redacted as the contents are out of scope of your request.

 

The information supplied to you continues to be protected by copyright.
You are free to use it for your own purposes, including for private study
and non-commercial research, and for any other purpose authorised by an
exception in current copyright law. Documents (except photographs) can be
also used in the UK without requiring permission for the purposes of news
reporting. Any other re-use, for example commercial publication, would
require the permission of the copyright holder.

Most documents produced by a government department or agency will be
protected by Crown Copyright. Most Crown copyright information can be
re-used under the Open Government Licence
([1]http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/o...). For
information about the OGL and about re-using Crown Copyright information
please see The National Archives website
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/infor...
.

Copyright in other documents may rest with a third party. For information
about obtaining permission from a third party see the Intellectual
Property Office’s website at [2]www.ipo.gov.uk.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please
remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are unhappy with the way your request has been handled, you should
make a complaint to the Department by writing to me within two calendar
months of the date of this letter.  Your complaint will be considered by
an independent review panel, who were not involved in the original
consideration of your request. 

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint to the
Department, you may then contact the Information Commissioner’s Office. 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Neville Bolton

Office of the Regional Schools Commissioner for the South East and South
London

References

Visible links
1. http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/o...
2. http://www.ipo.gov.uk/