Evidence that Crime and Courts Act 2013 s.40 would risk financial ruin for publishers.

The request was successful.

Christopher Whitmey

Dear Department for Culture, Media and Sport

What tangible evidence has the Secretary of State or the Department got that Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, would risk financial ruin for publishers?

I previously asked for this information on 1 November 2022. The Department relied on section 35 (formulation or development of government policy) to withhold the requested information.
The Information Commissioner reviewed the decision to withhold the information and held that the exemption at section 35 was engaged, and he found that then the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosure.

The Commissioner’s Decision Notice https://tinyurl.com/ic-208973-x3z2 included:
Commissioner’s Reasonings
18. The Commissioner has viewed a copy of the withheld information and it does relate to the government policy issue of the repeal of section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 as stated by the public authority. In this regard the exemption is engaged.
Public interest test
19. Section 35 is a qualified exemption and therefore the Commissioner must consider whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the withheld information. …
25. … In the circumstances of this case the Commissioner accepts DCMS’ position that at the time of the request [November 2022] the development of its policy regarding the repeal of section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 was live. ...
26. That said, the Commissioner also recognises the considerable weight of the public interest in disclosure. Both the relevant House of Commons Select Committee and the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) have urged the government to enact Section 40 rather than repeal it. These are both parties with significant interest in the proper function of press regulation. The Commissioner notes that considerable public money has been spent to bring the PRP into operation.
27. The Commissioner is satisfied that there is a considerable public interest in the proper function of press regulation. Disclosure in this case could serve that interest by showing some of the points being considered in the development of government policy on this subject. This could enhance public discussion of this important subject.
28. That said, the Commissioner recognises that considerable weight must also be given to the fact that this was a live matter at the time of the request. The public interest in protecting the safe space in which the ongoing development of policy is discussed is particularly strong. Had the matter not been live, the Commissioner may well have reached a different view given the importance of the public interest in informing public discussion of this subject.
29. In light of the above, the Commissioner has concluded by a narrow margin that the public interest favours maintaining the exemption at section 35(1)(a). He has given particular weight to the fact that government policy development was live at the time of the request. The public interest is best served by ensuring the best quality policy making in a safe space for discussion. Therefore, the information was correctly withheld in response to the complainant’s request.

As Parliament is presently considering the repeal of section 40 in the Media Bill please can the information requested, and already seen by the Commissioner, be sent to me forthwith.

Yours faithfully,

Christopher Whitmey

FOI Team, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Our ref: FOI2024/00297

Dear Christopher Whitmey,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 15th
January. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore reply at the latest by 12th
February.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Yours sincerely,

Freedom of Information Team

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

FOI Team, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

1 Attachment

Our Ref: FOI2024/00297

Please see the attached letter from the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport.

Kind regards,

Ministerial Support Team

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Christopher Whitmey

Dear FOI Team,
Your Ref: FOI2024/00297
You refuse my request as you claim 'As the policy issue in question is still live, we consider the information to remain exempt under section 35 (1) (a) as determined by the Information Commissioner's Office in their Decision Notice on 31 August 2023.'.
As Parliament is presently considering the repeal of section 40 in the Media Bill I fail to comprehend how the policy is still live in any meaningful sense.
The evidence is needed so that MPs and the public can assess whether or not the repeal is justified.
I am complaining to the Information Commissioner.
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Whitmey

Christopher Whitmey

Dear Department for Culture, Media and Sport,
Your Ref: FOI2024/00297
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

The ICO have asked me to request an internal review of Department for Culture, Media and Sport's handling of my FOI request 'Evidence that Crime and Courts Act 2013 s.40 would risk financial ruin for publishers.'.

As the repeal of s.40 is now set out in clause 50 of the Media Bill before Parliament it is false to claim that the policy of repeal is still under consideration.

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

Yours faithfully,

Christopher Whitmey

Christopher Whitmey

Dear FOI Team,
Your Ref: FOI2024/00297
On the 23rd February 2024 I asked for an Internal Review. It is now 26th March 2024. The Information Commissioner’s guidance: “The Information Commissioner’s Office recommends that public authorities carry out internal reviews within 20 working days."
If I do not receive it by the close of business on Friday 29th March 2024 I will refer the matter to the ICO.

Yours sincerely,

Christopher Whitmey

FOI Team, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

1 Attachment

Our Ref: IR2024/01525

Please see the attached letter from the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport.

Kind regards,

Ministerial Support Team

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Christopher Whitmey left an annotation ()

The refusal has been referred to the ICO.

Christopher Whitmey left an annotation ()

The ICO have told me they have investigated and plan to have their decision notice issued by 06 October 2024.

Christopher Whitmey left an annotation ()

ICO decision 03 October 2024:
The Commissioner requires DCMS to take the following steps to ensure
compliance with the legislation:
• Disclose the information falling within the scope of the request
(including the .xlsx attachment to the email chain of 23
September 2016), subject to any appropriate redactions for
personal data.
Full report: https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-tak...

Christopher Whitmey

Dear FOI Team,
Your Ref: IR2024/01525
On 03 October 2024 the ICO sent you their Decision Notice Reference: IC-298155-W7T2 requesting you to send me the information I'd asked for.
Please can you send the information to this address where my request came from?
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Whitmey

FOI Team, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

3 Attachments

Our Ref: FOI2024/00297

Please see the attached letter from the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport.

Kind regards,

Ministerial Support Team

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Christopher Whitmey

Dear FOI Team,
Your Ref: FOI2024/00297 Thank you for sending the information to my WhatDoTheyKnow account. I've only just glanced at it. But one part that has struck me is, "So I really would guard against too much reliance being placed on these figures. And they clearly shouldn't be the sole or even primary factor for decision making."
So we are left wondering what really persuaded the repeal of s.40.
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Whitmey

FOI Team, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

5 Attachments

Our Ref: FOI2024/00297

Please see attached 3 documents from the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport that were not part of our previous response, these were not included
due to formatting issues. We have also included our response document and
attachment 1 for completeness.

Kind regards,

Ministerial Support Team

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Christopher Whitmey left an annotation ()

Three new files claim they are *.csv format but they don't open legibly. Have asked WDTK for advice.

Christopher Whitmey

Dear Department for Culture, Media and Sport,
I regret to say the three new files you sent me do not open correctly. They are in *.csv format. When opened they appear in a spreadsheet format but with the cell breaks coming in the wrong places and don't make sense: possibly because of the '£' sign included.
Please re-send the information in a readable and clear *.pdf or other format .
Yours faithfully,
Christopher Whitmey

FOI Mailbox, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

1 Attachment

Hello Mr Whitmey,
Apologies for this, we have been instructed to stop releasing Xcel format
documents, and sometimes converting to .csv format does pose some issues.
Please find attached the CSV files in PDF format.
Kind regards,
Chris

Freedom of Information Team

Ministerial Support Team

100 Parliament Street, LONDON SW1A 2BQ

020 7211 6111 | [1][DCMS request email]

[2]www.gov.uk/dcms

On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 10:14, Christopher Whitmey <[3][FOI #1071332
email]> wrote:

Dear Department for Culture, Media and Sport,
I regret to say  the three new files you sent me do not open correctly. 
They are in *.csv format.  When opened they appear in a spreadsheet
format but with  the cell breaks coming in the wrong places and don't
make sense: possibly because of the '£' sign included.
Please re-send the information in a readable and clear *.pdf or other
format .
Yours faithfully,
Christopher Whitmey

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[4][FOI #1071332 email]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published
on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[5]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:
[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...
[7]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses
will be delayed.

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[dcms%20request%20email]
2. http://www.gov.uk/dcms
3. mailto:[foi%20#1071332%20email]
4. mailto:[foi%20#1071332%20email]
5. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
6. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...
7. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

Christopher Whitmey

Dear Chris,

Your speedy reply and attachment appreciated. But I regret to say the *.pdf pages are A4 landscape wide and some of the spreadsheet pages where wider than that. Hence not clear with some lines split over two pages which parts relate to which.
You say you have been told not to send *.xlsx files. Why not?

The ICO decision notice clearly stated:
4. The Commissioner requires DCMS to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:
• Disclose the information falling within the scope of the request (including the .xlsx attachment to the email chain of 23 September 2016), subject to any appropriate redactions for personal data.
In your main document sent the attachments to the 23 September 2016 includes 'Leverson_Section 40_Extrapolation Analysis.xlsx'.
I presume what you have just sent me is that xlsx file?
As the ICO specified the xlsx attachment please can you send me that file?

Yours sincerely,

Christopher Whitmey

FOI Mailbox, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

1 Attachment

Hello Mr Whitmey,
I apologise that the PDFs did not hold all of the information. We have
been instructed not to send .xlsx files for security reasons, however, due
to the issues we are facing, and after consulting with colleagues, we have
decided to release this information in .xlsx format, please find this
attached. I can also confirm that this document is the exempt document
'Leverson_Section 40_Extrapolation Analysis.xlsx'.
Kind regards,
Chris

Freedom of Information Team

Ministerial Support Team

100 Parliament Street, LONDON SW1A 2BQ

020 7211 6111 | [1][DCMS request email]

[2]www.gov.uk/dcms

On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 15:15, Christopher Whitmey <[3][FOI #1071332
email]> wrote:

Dear Chris,

Your speedy reply and attachment appreciated.  But I regret to say the
*.pdf pages are A4 landscape wide and some of the spreadsheet pages
where wider than that.  Hence not clear with some lines split over two
pages which parts relate to which.
You say you have been told not to send *.xlsx files.  Why not?

The ICO decision notice clearly stated:
4. The Commissioner requires DCMS to take the following steps to ensure
compliance with the legislation: 
• Disclose the information falling within the scope of the request
(including the .xlsx attachment to the email chain of 23 September
2016), subject to any appropriate redactions for personal data.
In your main document sent the attachments to the 23 September 2016
includes 'Leverson_Section 40_Extrapolation Analysis.xlsx'.
I presume what you have just sent me is that xlsx file?
As the ICO specified the xlsx attachment please can you send me that
file?

Yours sincerely,

Christopher Whitmey

show quoted sections

Christopher Whitmey

Dear Chris,
Thank you for explaining and getting an exception agreed. I've downloaded the file and it is now very clear how the parts relate.
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Whitmey