ICAlert related agreements with police and other organisations

The request was refused by South West Grid for Learning Trust.

Dear South West Grid for Learning Trust,

Please supply me with your memorandum of understanding, agreements or contracts concluded with:

(1) The Internet Watch Foundation
(2) The Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit
(3) Local police authorities for receipt of alerts from your product ICAlert, following access attempts from users in schools and colleges

Please also supply me with:

(4) A list of schools that are using the ICAlert product

Yours faithfully,

Jim Killock

SWGfL Enquiries, South West Grid for Learning Trust

Dear Mr Killock

 

Thank you for your freedom of information request received on 17 April
2017.

 

Please supply me with your memorandum of understanding, agreements or
contracts concluded with:

 

1)     The Internet Watch Foundation

 

2)     The Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit

 

3)     Local police authorities for receipt of alerts from your product
ICAlert, following access attempts from users in schools and colleges

 

Please also supply me with:

 

4)     A list of schools that are using the ICAlert product

 

Your request has been considered under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
(FOIA).

 

1)     Your request for any memorandum of understanding, agreements or
contracts concluded with the Internet Watch Foundation has been refused.
This is due to the exemption under Part II FOIA relating to “Health and
Safety” (section 38), as outlined further below.

2)     Your request for any memorandum of understanding, agreements or
contracts concluded with The Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit
(CTIRU) has been refused. This is due to the exemption under Part II FOIA
relating to "national security" (section 24), as outlined further below.

3)     We do not hold any memorandum of understanding, agreements or
contracts concluded with local police authorities so these cannot be
supplied.

4)     There are currently no schools subscribing to the ICAlert product
on an ongoing basis. There are a number of schools piloting the product,
though this is subject to change due to the nature of a pilot arrangement.

 

Health and Safety Exemption - Your Request Number 1

 

38 – Health and safety.

 

(1)   Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act
would, or would be likely to—

a.     endanger the physical or mental health of any individual, or

b.    endanger the safety of any individual.

 

(2)   The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent
that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would, or would be likely to, have
either of the effects mentioned in subsection (1).

 

Why information in the agreement falls within the exemption

 

We believe having investigated the matter your FOIA request falls within
the health and safety exemption due to the inclusion of specific
obligations to keep the agreement confidential, termination rights for
failure to do so and references within the agreement to measures designed
to protect individuals from harm. We are not obliged to disclose the
specificities of this information any further as is our right under the
FOIA.

 

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that, after weighing up
both sides, it is in the interests of the public to maintain the health
and safety of individuals.

 

National Security exemption - Your Request Number 2

 

24.— National security.

 

(1)   Information which does not fall within section 23(1) is exempt
information if exemption from section 1(1)(b) is required for the purpose
of safeguarding national security.

(2)   The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent
that, exemption from section 1(1)(a) is required for the purpose of
safeguarding national security.

(3)   A certificate signed by a Minister of the Crown certifying that
exemption from section 1(1)(b), or from section 1(1)(a) and (b), is, or at
any time was, required for the purpose of safeguarding national security
shall, subject to section 60, be conclusive evidence of that fact.

(4)   A certificate under subsection (3) may identify the information to
which it applies by means of a general description and may be expressed to
have prospective effect.

 

Why information in the agreement falls within the exemption

 

On initial investigation we believe the information falls within the
national security exemption due to the inclusion of specific references to
anti-terrorism measures within the agreement. We are not obliged to
disclose the specificities of this information any further as is our right
under the FOIA.

 

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that, after weighing up
both sides, it is in the interests of the public to maintain national
security.

 

Section 17

 

17.— Refusal of request.

 

(1)   A public authority which, in relation to any request for
information, is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision of
Part II relating to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request
or on a claim that information is exempt information must, within the time
for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice which—

a.     states that fact,

b.    specifies the exemption in question, and

c.     states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

(4)   A public authority is not obliged to make a statement under
subsection (1)(c) or (3) if, or to the extent that, the statement would
involve the disclosure of information which would itself be exempt
information.

 

On initial investigation we believe that, in all the circumstances of the
case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the
public interest in disclosing the information.

 

Extension of time

 

We require an extension of time to proceed with seeking certification from
a Minister of the Crown that the 'national security' exemption indeed
applies to the agreement requested. This extension of time is allowed
pursuant to the FOIA for a "reasonable" time - the guidance for the FOIA
states this should be no longer than 20 working days.

 

Yours sincerely

David Wright

 

show quoted sections

Dear SWGfL Enquiries and David,

We will write a fuller reply later, but could I in the short term urge you to think about redacting the parts of the IWF and CTIRU documents that may fall under “health and safety” or “national security” exemptions.

It seems unlikely that the majority of the content of these would relate to these concerns. The other parts would help the public interest in understanding better what the general nature of the agreements are and keeping these law enforcement issues as transparent as possible.

Redaction is envisaged within FoI, and seems a potential mitigation in these cases.

Yours sincerely,

Jim Killock

SWGfL Enquiries, South West Grid for Learning Trust

Dear Mr Killock

Thank you for your further email.

We have considered your further request. In this case the original reasons for refusal shall continue to apply; we do not consider that providing redacted versions would ameliorate these issues.

Yours sincerely
Paul Hancock

show quoted sections

Dear SWGfL Enquiries,

Thank you for the reply. To clarify, in your last email you wrote that:

“We require an extension of time to proceed with seeking certification from a Minister of the Crown that the 'national security' exemption indeed applies to the agreement requested. This extension of time is allowed
pursuant to the FOIA for a "reasonable" time - the guidance for the FOIA states this should be no longer than 20 working days.”

Has this taken place? Or is this still in progress?

Yours sincerely,

Jim Killock

Dear South West Grid for Learning Trust,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of South West Grid for Learning Trust's handling of my FOI request 'ICAlert related agreements with police and other organisations'.

I would in particular like you to examine whether the whole content of both agreements can reasonably be considered to

It seems to me that you acknowledge that the agreement can only relate in part to national security: as you state, it has “ the inclusion of specific references to anti-terrorism measures within the agreement”. I would like you to remove these and consider supplying the remainder of the agreement.

CTIRU are performing an important task, but in order to have confidence in it, some disclosure is needed. Their task, for instance, is framed as supply of lists and takedown requests to disrupt those who are seeking to incite extremism and support for violence. Their work is assumed to primarily be for the purposes of safeguarding people. These are not national security tasks, in the normal understanding of the phrase.

Similarly, I would suspect that only part of the agreement you have with the IWF could have a heath and safety impact. It is not clear to me what the nature of this impact is, and I would also appreciate an explanation of the nature of the health and safety impact. To date, my understanding of IWF blocking has been that it is meant primarily as a protection for inadvertent access. The IWF is not a law enforcement body, so health and safety aspects should be narrowly construed.

You cite the presence of confidentiality within the IWF agreement. Commercial confidentiality can be claimed, but in these cases, the public interest in disclosure needs to be examined. The IWF perform an important role, but transparency is extremely important in order to assure that we can trust that their activities are limited to blocking a very small range of illegal content. We do not need to know precise arrangements concerning the transfer of the lists, and other matters which might affect the confidential nature of the lists. However, understanding the broad topics and aims of the agreement through a partially redacted agreement would aid public accountability.

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

Yours faithfully,

Jim Killock

SWGfL Enquiries, South West Grid for Learning Trust

Dear Mr Killock

We acknowledge your request for an internal review regarding a response to your FOI request 'ICAlert related agreements with police and other organisations'. We will consider your request and provide a reply by 25 July 2017 at the latest.

Regards
Paul Hancock
South West Grid for Learning Trust

show quoted sections

SWGfL Enquiries, South West Grid for Learning Trust

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Killock

 

Thank you for your request of 27 June 2017 requesting an internal review
of South West Grid for Learning Trust's handling of your FOI request
'ICAlert related agreements with police and other organisations'.

 

The Senior Management Team have conducted a review, discussing the various
aspects of the requests made and the responses provided. 

 

Summary:

 

We consider that the FOIA has been properly applied, and that the grounds
for not permitting disclosure are consistent with the exemptions cited and
the public interest test.

 

The refusal process was considered in compliance with the provisions of
the FOIA.

 

Original Request(s):

 

1.     In respect of the agreement(s) with the Internet Watch Foundation
(IWF), your request for any memorandum of understanding, agreements or
contracts concluded with the Internet Watch Foundation has been refused.
This is due to the exemption under Part II FOIA relating to “Health and
Safety” (section 38), as outlined further below.

38 – Health and safety

(1)   Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act
would, or would be likely to—

a. endanger the physical or mental health of any individual, or

b. endanger the safety of any individual.

(2)   The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent
that, compliance with section 1 (1) (a) would, or would be likely to, have
either of the effects mentioned in subsection (1).

 

Why information in the agreement falls within the exemption

We believe having investigated the matter your FOIA request falls within
the health and safety exemption due to the inclusion of specific
obligations to keep the agreement confidential, termination rights for
failure to do so and references within the agreement to measures designed
to protect individuals from harm. We are not obliged to disclose the
specificities of this information any further as is our right under the
FOIA.

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that, after weighing up
both sides, it is in the interests of the public to maintain the health
and safety of individuals.

 

Following the internal review, we continue to consider that the exemption
applies and, consequently, continue to refuse to disclose this
information.

 

2.     In respect of the agreement(s) with the Counter Terrorism Internet
Referral Unit (CTIRU), your request for any memorandum of understanding,
agreements or contracts concluded with The Counter Terrorism Internet
Referral Unit (CTIRU) has been refused. This is due to the exemption under
Part II FOIA relating to "national security" (section 24), as outlined
further below.

24 — National security

(1)   Information which does not fall within section 23 (1) is exempt
information if exemption from section 1 (1) (b) is required for the
purpose of safeguarding national security.

(2)   The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent
that, exemption from section 1 (1) (a) is required for the purpose of
safeguarding national security.

(3)   A certificate signed by a Minister of the Crown certifying that
exemption from section 1 (1) (b), or from section 1 (1) (a) and (b), is,
or at any time was, required for the purpose of safeguarding national
security shall, subject to section 60, be conclusive evidence of that
fact.

(4)   A certificate under subsection (3) may identify the information to
which it applies by means of a general description and may be expressed to
have prospective effect.

 

Why information in the agreement falls within the exemption

 

On initial investigation we believe the information falls within the
national security exemption due to the inclusion of specific references to
anti-terrorism measures within the agreement. We are not obliged to
disclose the specificities of this information any further as is our right
under the FOIA.

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that, after weighing up
both sides, it is in the interests of the public to maintain national
security.

 

Following the internal review, we continue to consider that the exemption
applies, however pursuant to your subsequent request (set out below) we
have considered and adopted an alternative approach.

 

3.     In respect of the refusal to disclose the information, section 17
of the FOIA was applied.

17 — Refusal of request.

(1)   A public authority which, in relation to any request for
information, is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision of
Part II relating to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request
or on a claim that information is exempt information must, within the time
for complying with section 1 (1), give the applicant a notice which—

a.     states that fact,

b.    specifies the exemption in question, and

c.     states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

(4)   A public authority is not obliged to make a statement under
subsection (1) (c) or (3) if, or to the extent that, the statement would
involve the disclosure of information which would itself be exempt
information.

 

Following the internal review we believe that, in all the circumstances of
the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the
public interest in disclosing the information.

 

Subsequent Request(s):

 

Subsequent to the original request of 17 April 2017, you made a further
request of 17 May 2017 in which you asked us to consider redacting the
parts of the IWF and CTIRU documents that fall under “health and safety”
or “national security” exemptions.

 

1.     In respect of the agreement(s) with the IWF, following the internal
review, we consider that the exemptions applied in respect of the IWF
agreement would apply equally to any redacted version of that agreement.

 

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that it is in the
interests of the public to maintain the health and safety of individuals.

 

Pursuant to section 17 (4) of the FOIA, it would undermine the purpose of
the exemption to explain in any greater detail why the request has been
refused, and as such no further detail shall be provided.

 

2.     In respect of the agreement(s) with the CTIRU, following the
internal review we consider that the CTIRU agreement can be redacted,
permitting certain information to be disclosed.

In reaching this decision the South West Grid for Learning Trust has
considered the public interest test and concluded that it is in the
interests of the public to maintain national security, but that this can
be maintained following any disclosure by removal of specific references
to anti-terrorism measures within the agreement.

 

Consequently, we have removed certain information from the relevant
agreement and can now provide this redacted version.

 

Pursuant to section 17 (4) of the FOIA, it would undermine the purpose of
the exemption to explain in any greater detail why certain information has
been considered exempt from disclosure and removed from the copy of the
agreement to be disclosed, and as such no further detail shall be
provided.

Appeal:

 

You may appeal to the Information Commissioner should you wish to.
Complaints can be made to the Information Commissioner after the public
authority's internal review procedure. Complaints must be made within 3
months of the last meaningful contact with the public authority concerned.
You are required to complete the form entitled "Accessing official
information concerns form" found on the ICO's website and provide
supporting evidence, or you can use the ICO's live chat service or call
0303 123 1113.

 

 

Yours sincerely

Paul Hancock

 

show quoted sections