Great Musgrave bridge
Dear Sir/Madam
Could you please provide me with copies of all correspondence, messages, reports and other documentation exchanged between the Council (mostly your Highways department) and National Highways since 16 June 2022 regarding the bridge carrying the B6259 over the dismantled railway at Great Musgrave.
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bickerdike
Environmental Information Regulations 2004 Reference: FOI-137516-2023
Thank you for your request for information regarding Great Musgrave
Bridge, which was received on 04/10/2023.
The council aims to provide you with the information within the statutory
timescale of 20 working days in this case the date is 31/10/2023.
Subject to the information not being exempt or containing any references
to third parties.
The council will, as a matter of routine make information available in
electronic format. Where it is not practical to do this information will
be provided in hard copy (paper). If information is required in
alternative formats e.g. language, audio, large print, etc., please
indicate this as soon as possible so the council can consider your
request.
The Environmental Information Regulations 2004 define a number of
exemptions/exceptions which may prevent information being released to you
automatically. The council will make an assessment about the application
of any exemptions/exceptions and issue you with a decision letter, which
will include details of your right to appeal.
If the information you request contains reference to a third party the
council will consult with them prior to making a decision about the
release of information.
In accordance with the council's Charging Policy a fee may be charged for
supplying information. If a fee is payable you will be issued with a fees
notice. The applicable fee must be paid in full before the information is
processed and released. The statutory time limit for responses is
suspended until the council has received and processed your payment. If
payment is not received within three months of issuing the fees notice
your request will be closed.
If you have any queries or concerns about this email do not hesitate to
contact us.
Many thanks
Information Governance Team
[Westmorland and Furness Council request email]
01539 637437
Dear Graeme
I am writing to inform you that I am extending the timescale for the above
request for a further 20 working days from the current deadline date of
the 31^st October 2023, taking us to the 28^th November 2023.
“Regulation 7(1)(3) – requirement to notify the requester that the
authority needs an extension of time to deal with a request which is
complex or voluminous.”
The reason for this extension is due to the volume of work. I have
received 57 separate documents from the service, some with multiple pages
and each page needs reviewing and some need redacting manually which can
take 2-5 minutes per page. Some pages are emails which needed manually
converting to PDF to ensure the information is both non-editable and easy
to read.
In addition to the volume of work, I may also need to send out Third party
consultations as some of the information is about other organisations. I
will give the organisations a timescale in line with the new deadline,
which will allow them to get back to me with any objections before we
release this information.
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards,
Jayne Harty
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
0300 373 3300
This e-mail contains confidential information (which may also be legally
privileged) and is intended solely for the use of the intended named
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you may not disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any part of this message or its attachments. If
you have received this message in error please notify the originator
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software. Incoming
and outgoing emails may be monitored in line with current legislation. All
copies of the message received in error should be destroyed. Any views or
opinions expressed are solely those of the original author. This email
message has been scanned for viruses, and declared to be virus free at the
point of exit from Council's network.
Dear Jayne
I'm sorry to hear my request is proving onerous - I didn't envisage that quite so many documents would fall within scope.
I look forward to receiving the material, and details of any applied exemptions arising from third-party "objections", by 28 November 2023.
Yours sincerely
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Sir/Madam
Could you please update me as to when I will receive a full response to this request, noting that it is now two weeks beyond the extended deadline date.
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bickerdike,
Thank you for your email.
We are currently considering the public interest with regard to disclosure and are consulting with relevant third parties in this regard.
Due to the volume of information involved this has been quite cumbersome.
I am hoping to have a response ready by the end of next week.
Regards,
Ian
Ian Bonfig
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
0300 373 3300
Dear Sir/Madam
It is now 69 working days since I submitted my request FOI-137516-2023 regarding Great Musgrave bridge and three weeks after the date on which you were “hoping to have a response ready”.
I note that on 20 October 2023, you stated that you had “received 57 separate documents from the service”, suggesting that the task of sourcing the requested information had been completed. Whilst recognising that the names of individuals would have to be redacted in accordance with EIR exceptions relating to personal data, I am not clear as to why I have still not received a response 12 weeks later.
You state that “We are currently considering the public interest with regard to disclosure”, but you have not specified which qualified exception you are seeking to apply that would require a public interest test. The request is for copies of materials/messages exchanged between two public bodies about a bridge, an issue which is not inherently sensitive. You also state that you are “consulting with relevant third parties in this regard”, but do not explain the specific basis for doing so.
It is recognised that the third party will not want the information to be disclosed as it is seeking to prevent any further scrutiny of its actions in relation to this structure. However, this is clearly not a legitimate reason for refusal.
It is in the public interest to fully understand the context that resulted in a valued heritage asset being unnecessarily infilled at a cost to the taxpayer of £124K, an act that resulted in the issuing of an enforcement notice for removal of the infill due to conflicts with local and national planning policies. It is also in the public interest to understand how infill allegedly needed because of overloading and to “avert a collapse” could be removed - for a cost the third party is withholding - without the bridge being strengthened prior to reopening. It is also in the public interest to know why removal of the infill required a road closure that disrupted local people and businesses for 13 weeks. It is also in the public interest to understand whether the two public bodies had different perspectives about the risks associated with the bridge and approaches to asset management as this may be relevant in challenging the third party’s actions elsewhere.
I look forward to receiving your substantive response no later than Friday 19 January.
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Sir/Madam
As a result of your failure to provide a response, I would like to request that an internal review is undertaken of your Council’s processing of my FoI request FOI-137516-2023, regarding Great Musgrave bridge. It is now 75 working days since the date of submission (4 October 2023), almost four times longer than the period normally permitted.
On 20 October 2023, you stated that you had “received 57 separate documents from the service”, suggesting that the task of sourcing the requested information had been completed. Whilst recognising that the names of individuals would have to be redacted in accordance with EIR exceptions relating to personal data, it is not clear why I have still not received a response.
You state that “We are currently considering the public interest with regard to disclosure”, but you have not specified which qualified exception you are seeking to apply that would require a public interest test. The request is for copies of documentation/communications exchanged between two public bodies about a bridge, an issue which, on its face, is mundane and not inherently sensitive. You also state that you are “consulting with relevant third parties in this regard”, but do not explain the specific basis for doing so.
It is recognised that the third party does not want the information to be disclosed as it is seeking to prevent any further scrutiny of its actions in relation to this structure. However, this is clearly not a legitimate reason for refusal. The fundamental principle behind FoI legislation is that people have a right to know about the activities of public authorities, in order to hold them accountable for their actions. This is why there is a presumption in favour of disclosure.
It is in the public interest:
• to fully understand the context that resulted in a valued heritage asset being unnecessarily infilled at a cost to the taxpayer of £124K, an act that resulted in the issuing of an enforcement notice for removal of the infill due to conflicts with local and national planning policies.
• to understand how infill allegedly needed because of overloading and to “avert a collapse” could be removed - for a cost the third party is withholding - without the bridge being strengthened prior to reopening.
• to know why removal of the infill required a road closure that disrupted local people and businesses for 13 weeks.
• to understand whether the two public bodies had different perspectives about the risks associated with the bridge and approaches to asset management as this may be relevant in challenging the third party’s actions elsewhere.
The public interest is, in part, further demonstrated by 911 objections to the retrospective planning application for retention of Great Musgrave bridge’s infill and a debate in the House of Lords during which infill schemes were referred to a “cultural vandalism”.
I look forward to receiving the findings of your internal review in due course.
Regards
Graeme Bickerdike
(A full history of my request is available at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/g...)
[1]Egress logo
A file has been sent to you
securely using Egress
Click to [2]access the secure
file online.
This free service is provided by
Cumberland Council, Westmorland &
Furness Council and Cumbria Fire
& Rescue Service. This enables
the organisations to communicate
securely via email.
If this is the first time you
have used Egress you will need to
Register for a free account
please click on the link above
‘access the secure file’ to
register or to login (if already
registered).
Regular user? [3]Download our free
desktop or mobile apps.
Having problems accessing the
file? [4]Click Here
Confidentiality Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error
please notify the sender.
© Copyright 2007-2015 Egress Software Technologies Ltd.
References
Visible links
2. https://reader.egress.com/remote.aspx/r/... address]
3. http://www.egress.com/downloads/
4. http://www.egress.com/support-articles-g...
Dear Sir/Madam
I have tried clicking on the Egress link to download the file, but get the message...
"Sorry, the package you requested is not available for download yet.
"This may happen if the package author is still uploading it. Depending on the size of the package it may take a few minutes.
"Please wait a little and retry."
I have waited an hour and still get the same message. I therefore presume that the issue is NOT because the file is still uploading.
Could you please advise how this issue could be addressed?
Yours sincerely
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bickerdike,
It may be that whatdotheyknow is incompatible with egress.
Do you have an alternative email address we can send the response to?
Alternatively, we would be happy to post this to you.
If you could please let us know.
Regards,
Ian
Ian Bonfig
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
0300 373 3300
Dear Ian
You'll recognise that I wouldn't want to publish a personal email address on WhatDoTheyKnow?, but you could send the response to our campaign group's general contact address, which I will pick up. It is...
campaignATthehregroupDOTorg
I hope that works.
Yours sincerely
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bickerdike,
Not a problem, I'll send it through.
If there are any issues please let me know.
Regards,
Ian
Ian Bonfig
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
0300 373 3300
Dear Ian
Many thanks for sending the download link directly to us.
Whilst we fully recognise the Council's Data Protection obligations in processing this request, we believe the extent of the redactions goes beyond 'personal data'. To make sense of an email exchange, it is important to know the sender and recipient's organisations and, preferably, their specific roles.
We will send a sample of how National Highways deals with this issue to your Information Governance email address. We would then ask that you reprocess the email exchanges within your response along the lines taken by NH.
Yours sincerely
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bickerdike
Freedom of Information Act 2000, Internal Review Acknowledgement
Reference: FOI-137516-2023
Following the disclosure that we sent to you on 09/01/2024 in response to
your request about Great Musgrave Bridge.
As you are dissatisfied with the way your request has been handled your
request will now be considered through the Council's internal review
process. The internal review will be carried out by Katherine Dalgliesh,
Complaints & Information Governance Officer.
The internal review stage is an opportunity to consider the request
afresh. The disclosure made by the council will be considered, in the
light of all the relevant information.
Following the internal review the Council aims to respond within 20
working days. If for any reason we are unable to meet that time frame we
will let you know.
If you are not satisfied with the council's internal review you have the
right to appeal to the Information Commissioner (contact details provided
below):
First Contact Team
Information Commissioners Office
Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF
Telephone: 0303 123 1113
E-mail: [email address]
[1]https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint
If you have any queries please contact us.
Many thanks
Information Governance Team
[Westmorland and Furness Council request email]
01539 637437
References
Visible links
1. https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint
Dear Sir/Madam
I suggest the Council pauses the Internal Review pending the outcome of yesterday's message to Ian Bonfig regarding redactions. (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/g...) If this specific concern is resolved promptly and appropriately, I would be content to withdraw my request for an Internal Review.
Please advise me of your intended approach.
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Sir/Madam
Could you please update me as to when I will receive the findings of your internal review into my FOI request FOI-137516-2023, the request for which you acknowledged on 31 January (41 workings days ago)?
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Good morning Mr Bickerdike
I am sorry for the delay. I completed my review and requested approval for release at the beginning of March but unfortunately there has been a delay in obtaining this approval. I have chased this today and hope to have the response to you this afternoon. It will come via Egress as there are a number of large files. You will need to register with Egress (this is free) to access the information. If you have any problems, please let me know.
Kind regards
Katherine Dalgliesh
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance & Complaints Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
T: 01539 637437
Dear Graeme Bickerdike
Environmental Information Regulations 2004 Reference: FOI-137516-2023
Please see attached for a response to your Internal Review Request.
Many thanks
Information Governance Team
[Westmorland and Furness Council request email]
01539 637437
[1]Egress logo
A file has been sent to you
securely using Egress
Click to [2]access the secure
file online.
This free service is provided by
Cumberland Council, Westmorland &
Furness Council and Cumbria Fire
& Rescue Service. This enables
the organisations to communicate
securely via email.
If this is the first time you
have used Egress you will need to
Register for a free account
please click on the link above
‘access the secure file’ to
register or to login (if already
registered).
Regular user? [3]Download our free
desktop or mobile apps.
Having problems accessing the
file? [4]Click Here
Confidentiality Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error
please notify the sender.
© Copyright 2007-2015 Egress Software Technologies Ltd.
This e-mail contains confidential information (which may also be legally
privileged) and is intended solely for the use of the intended named
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you may not disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any part of this message or its attachments. If
you have received this message in error please notify the originator
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software. Incoming
and outgoing emails may be monitored in line with current legislation. All
copies of the message received in error should be destroyed. Any views or
opinions expressed are solely those of the original author. This email
message has been scanned for viruses, and declared to be virus free at the
point of exit from Council's network.
References
Visible links
2. https://reader.egress.com/remote.aspx/r/... address]
3. http://www.egress.com/downloads/
4. http://www.egress.com/support-articles-g...
Dear Sir/Madam
Many thanks for sending your internal review and the revised emails.
As experienced previously, I cannot download files sent via Egress as WhatDoTheyKnow? does not seem to support the links used for access purposes.
I have downloaded a 34.9MB file entitled 'Redacted Emails' from the first message you sent on 2 April 2024. Could you please confirm if different file(s) were sent via Egress and, if so, could you please send them to me via a different method.
Yours faithfully
Graeme Bickerdike
Dear Graeme Bikerdike,
That is the correct file document which you've downloaded.
Regards,
Ian
Ian Bonfig
Information Governance & Complaints Officer
Information Governance Team
Enabler Services – Customer and Digital
Parkhouse Building, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4SJ
01539 637 437
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