Emails to/from Jim Harra containing the word suicide
Dear HM Revenue and Customs,
I am writing to request any and all emails and email chains sent to or from Mr. Jim Harra that contain the word "suicide". This request includes but is not limited to correspondence in which Mr. Harra is directly addressed or CC’d, and where the specified term appears in the subject line or body of the emails.
Please include emails within the timeframe of 1/1/2018 to 31/3/2024.
Yours faithfully,
James Brown
Our ref: FOI2024/38710
Dear James Brown,
Thank you for your request, which was received on 7 April.
Please remember to quote the reference number above if you need to contact
us about this request again.
We aim to respond to all freedom of information requests within 20 working
days. We will either send you the information you have asked for or let
you know why we can't.
If we can't reply by 3 May 2024, we will write to let you know the reason
and when you can expect a response.
Yours sincerely
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear Information Rights Unit,
It has now been more than 20 working days since this request was submitted and by law you should have responded by the 3rd May 2024.
Please provide the information requested.
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear Information Rights Unit,
By law HMRC should have responded to this request some time ago.
Please provide the information requested forthwith.
Oddly you suggested that you would provide an update by 3/5/24 , but that has not been forthcoming either.
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear James Brown
I am writing to update you on the status of your FOI request and to
apologise for our delay in issuing a response.
In dealing with all FOI requests HMRC works to the standard set by the
independent Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which is to deal with
at least 90% of FOI requests within 20 working days of receipt. While we
meet this target most of time, there are some cases that take longer than
20 days to process (for example, because of their complexity). Your FOI
request is one such case.
I want to assure you that we are still working on your request and aim to
provide a reply shortly.
Kind regards
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear Information Rights Unit,
7/4/24 - Request raised
4/5/24 - Reminder sent to HMRC to respond
6/6/24 -Second reminder as HMRC had not provided any response
7/6/24 HMRC respond stating that it is complex and may take more time
HMRC have now failed to provide a response in 50 days.
This is far outside the law and the guidelines of the ICO
Please provide the response forthwith. This is a simple request trying to understand how much Jim Harra was aware of the suicides caused by the Loan Charge. This has significant public interest, especially as the Post Office enquiry continues to expose how much senior managers knew of the suffering they were inflicting on the postmasters.
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear James Brown,
We are writing in response to your request for information, received 7
April.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear Information Rights Unit,
Thank you for your most recent response to my request.
You pointed out that Mr Harra, had significant volumes of correspondence containing the word suicide. This in itself is of some concern. However you also stated that my original request did not match my follow up emails where I made it clear that I was interested primarily in the suicides related to the Loan Charge
I will clarify my request to ensure that it does not encompass suicides related to other factors.
“I am writing to request any and all emails and email chains sent to or from Mr. Jim Harra
that contain the word "suicide". This request includes but is not limited to correspondence in
which Mr. Harra is directly addressed or CC'd, and where the specified term appears in the
subject line or body of the emails.
This should only include suicides related to the Loan Charge which as of today stands at 10.
Please include emails within the timeframe of 1/1/2018 to 31/3/2024
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Our ref: FOI2024/85973
Dear James Brown,
Thank you for your request, which was received on 25 June.
Please remember to quote the reference number above if you need to contact
us about this request again.
We aim to respond to all freedom of information requests within 20 working
days. We will either send you the information you have asked for or let
you know why we can't.
If we can't reply by 24 July 2024, we will write to let you know the
reason and when you can expect a response.
Yours sincerely
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear James Brown
The date that the response is due for your request, FOI2024/85973, has
been changed to 22nd August
Kind Regards
HMRC Freedom of Information team
Dear Information Rights Unit,
Re : FOI2024 85973
In your email dated 29/7/2024 you stated that you would provide a response by 22/8/2024.
This date has now passed, please provide the information requested
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear James Brown,
We are writing in response to your request for information, received 25
June.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear Information Rights Unit,
Thank you for your response to my FOI, FOI2024/85973
I am frustrated as you would expect that HMRC have chosen to invoke section 14 exemption, especially given the serious nature of the request. This is despite narrowing the scope of the request significantly.
As suggested I will narrow the scope further such that it should not impose a significant burden on HMRC resources.
I am writing to request any and all emails and email chains sent to or from Mr. Jim Harra that contain the word "suicide". This request includes but is not limited to correspondence in which Mr. Harra is directly addressed or CC'd, and where the specified term appears in the subject line or body of the emails.
This should only include suicides related to the Loan Charge which as of today stands at 10.
You do not need to include any attachments with the emails.
You do not need to include emails that exist in chains that are longer than 6 emails. Of course the first 6 most recent emails within a chain should be provided.
This should limit the number of pages requiring review for exemptions prior to release.
Please include emails within the timeframe of 1/1/2018 to 31/3/2024
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear Information Rights Unit,
Thank you for your response to my FOI, FOI2024/85973
I am frustrated as you would expect that HMRC have chosen to invoke section 14 exemption, especially given the serious nature of the request. This is despite narrowing the scope of the request significantly.
As suggested I narrowed the scope further such that it should not impose a significant burden on HMRC resources.
However HMRC have chosen to not respond to this request at all.
I am writing to request any and all emails and email chains sent to or from Mr. Jim Harra that contain the word "suicide". This request includes but is not limited to correspondence in which Mr. Harra is directly addressed or CC'd, and where the specified term appears in the subject line or body of the emails.
This should only include suicides related to the Loan Charge which as of today stands at 10.
You do not need to include any attachments with the emails.
You do not need to include emails that exist in chains that are longer than 6 emails. Of course the first 6 most recent emails within a chain should be provided.
This should limit the number of pages requiring review for exemptions prior to release.
Please include emails within the timeframe of 1/1/2018 to 31/3/2024
Yours sincerely,
James Brown
Dear James Brown,
We are writing in response to your request for information, received 28
August. Please note that due to file size we will send you the disclosure
in two parts.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear James Brown,
We are writing in response to your request for information, received 28
August.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Information Rights Unit
Dear HM Revenue and Customs,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of HM Revenue and Customs's handling of my FOI request 'Emails to/from Jim Harra containing the word suicide'.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/e...
I am writing to formally request an internal review of your decision to withhold information requested under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), as communicated in your letter dated 20 December 2024. Specifically, I challenge the application of Section 35(1)(a) and Section 36 exemptions to the requested information.
Challenge to Section 35(1)(a): Formulation/Development of Government Policy
The Section 35(1)(a) exemption has been applied to withhold information on the grounds that it relates to the formulation or development of government policy. I do not believe this exemption has been appropriately applied for the following reasons:
Relevance to Policy Formulation:
Section 35(1)(a) is a class-based exemption and applies only if the withheld information relates to the formulation or development of government policy. However, the information I have requested pertains specifically to email correspondence involving Mr. Jim Harra regarding suicides linked to the Loan Charge. This appears to relate to operational decision-making and departmental procedures, rather than the active formulation or development of government policy.
Please clarify how the withheld information directly and specifically relates to government policy formulation, rather than operational implementation or internal communication about the Loan Charge.
Timeframe of the Information Requested:
My request covers emails sent or received between 2018 and 2024. Much of this period relates to a time when Loan Charge policy decisions had already been implemented. The “safe space” argument for policy deliberation diminishes significantly for historical information or when a policy decision has already been made. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has clearly stated that Section 35(1)(a) is weaker once a policy decision is no longer live.
Please clarify how any withheld information continues to relate to active government policy development rather than historical policy decisions.
Public Interest Test for Section 35:
Even if the exemption is engaged, the FOIA requires the public interest test to be applied. I would argue that the public interest in disclosure significantly outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exemption for the following reasons:
The Loan Charge is a matter of profound public concern, linked to significant financial and emotional distress, and even suicides. Transparency regarding HMRC’s internal decision-making and correspondence on this topic is critical for maintaining public trust and accountability.
Disclosure of the requested information would shed light on how HMRC has handled these issues and provide valuable insights into the department’s awareness and response to the severe consequences of its policy.
The requested information is historical and unlikely to undermine current or future government policy discussions, reducing the weight of the “safe space” argument.
I respectfully request that HMRC provide further justification for its claim that the public interest in maintaining the Section 35 exemption outweighs the clear public interest in transparency regarding the Loan Charge.
Challenge to Section 36: Prejudice to the Effective Conduct of Public Affairs
The Section 36 exemption has been applied to withhold information on the grounds that its disclosure would likely inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or the effective conduct of public affairs. I challenge this exemption on the following grounds:
Improper Use of Section 36:
Section 36 is a prejudice-based exemption and requires certification from a qualified person (usually a senior official or Minister) to confirm that the exemption is engaged. Your response does not include any evidence that the qualified person has certified the engagement of Section 36.
Please confirm whether Section 36 has been properly engaged and provide evidence of the qualified person’s certification.
Lack of Demonstrable Prejudice:
For Section 36 to apply, HMRC must demonstrate how disclosure would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or otherwise prejudice public affairs. However, the information I requested relates to correspondence about suicides linked to the Loan Charge. The disclosure of such information would contribute to public accountability and understanding, rather than inhibit free and frank discussions.
Please explain precisely how disclosure of the withheld information would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or otherwise prejudice public affairs.
Public Interest Test for Section 36:
Section 36 is a qualified exemption and requires HMRC to balance the public interest in maintaining the exemption against the public interest in disclosure. In this case, the public interest in disclosure is overwhelming:
The Loan Charge is a highly controversial policy linked to severe mental health impacts and suicides. Public confidence in HMRC’s handling of these matters requires full transparency.
Disclosure would ensure accountability for the department’s actions, help improve future policy-making, and demonstrate a commitment to addressing public concerns around the Loan Charge.
The requested information is likely to be factual in nature, reflecting HMRC’s internal understanding of the Loan Charge’s consequences. Disclosure of such information would not prevent or inhibit future free and frank discussions.
HMRC’s justification for withholding the information under Section 36 does not adequately address these public interest considerations.
Conclusion and Request for Review
In light of the above, I respectfully request that HMRC conduct an internal review of its decision to withhold information under Sections 35(1)(a) and 36. I ask that the review considers the following:
Whether the withheld information truly relates to the formulation or development of government policy (Section 35), particularly given the historical nature of the information requested.
Whether HMRC has provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate how disclosure would prejudice public affairs (Section 36).
Whether the public interest in transparency, accountability, and public confidence in HMRC’s actions outweighs the interest in maintaining the exemptions.
I look forward to your response within the statutory timeframe. If you require further clarification of my request, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours faithfully,
James Brown
Our ref: IR2025/00834
Dear James Brown,
Thank you for your request for internal review, which was received on 9
January.
Please remember to quote the reference number above if you need to contact
us about this request again.
We aim to respond to all internal reviews within 20 working days. We will
either send you the information you have asked for or let you know why we
can't.
If we can't reply by 6th February, we will write to let you know the
reason and when you can expect a response.
Yours sincerely
HMRC Information Rights Unit
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