LFB policy documents
Dear London Fire Commissioner (London Fire Brigade),
Under the provisions of Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), I hereby request the disclosure of the following LFB policy documents as annotated by their policy number:
* 043;
* 050;
* 144;
* 168;
* 259;
* 261;
* 263;
* 483;
* 522;
* 594;
* 656;
* 664;
* 785;
* 805; and
* 833.
Given the nature of some of these documents, I would ask that you do not refuse disclosure but instead redact anything information at odds with Section 31 or Section 38 of the Act. This is in accordance with best practice from the Office of the Information Commissioner.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours faithfully,
Claire Ness
Dear Claire,
Thank you for your request.
This will be considered under the Freedom on Information Act (FOIA) and we will respond as soon as we are able. Please note, given the current situation with the Coronavirus, this may be outside of the normal, expected timeframe for a FOI response.
Thank you for your patience, with kind regards
Tavell
Tavell Carter
Information Access
London Fire Brigade
169 Union Street London SE1 0LL
T 020 8555 1200 x 30314
E [email address]
london-fire.gov.uk
If you think that this e-mail might not be intended for you please delete it immediately and contact me.
London Fire Brigade
For advice about how to stay safe from fire and other emergencies, please go to london-fire.gov.uk/Safety
The information in this email may contain confidential or privileged materials. Please read the full email disclaimer notice at london-fire.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer
The Brigade is committed to using personal data in a responsible and transparent way. To find out more visit london-fire.gov.uk/privacy
Dear London Fire Commissioner (London Fire Brigade),
Under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I am due a response to my request today and would like to request an update in relation to my request.
Given the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, I understand that there may be a delay in responding to my request. If this is the case, please let me know, and we can work around this.
Yours faithfully,
Claire Ness
Dear Claire,
Thank you for your Freedom of Information received on 19 May 2020 in relation to LFB policy documents.
I am very sorry for the delay in response. I have attached my full response as PDF document ‘FOIA5134.1 - Response'. The response contains formatting (such as tables or pictures) that are not currently supported by the WhatDoTheyKnow system.
I hope you find the information I have been able to provide of use. Should you have any further questions please do let me know.
This request has been dealt with under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. If you are dissatisfied by this response you can request an internal review by writing to the Head of Information Management at the address below (or email [email address]).
Further information about your information rights (including how to raise a concern or make a complaint) is available from the Information Commissioner’s Office on their website at www.ico.org.uk or by writing to them at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Kind regards,
Zoe
Zoe Hughes
Information Access
London Fire Brigade
169 Union Street London SE1 0LL
T 0208555 1200 x31075
E [email address]
Dear London Fire Commissioner (London Fire Brigade),
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of London Fire Commissioner (London Fire Brigade)'s handling of my FOI request 'LFB policy documents'.
You stated, in your response to me, that “whilst it could be argued that some individual paragraphs or sentences might appear innocuous on their own, given that they will be in the context of the named policy, I am of the view that the information is relevant enough for the exemption(s) to apply to the whole document”.
I am happy for you to redact to whatever extent you need to, even where it means the vast majority of the document is redacted, but would encourage you to redact as opposed to refuse disclosure.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/l...
Yours faithfully,
Claire Ness
Dear Claire,
I’m sorry our original response did not meet your information needs.
As a result this will be passed to the Head of Information Management to conduct an internal review into the handling of the request and our response (LFB ref: FOIA5134.2).
Whilst there is no official timeframe for conducting a review, good practice from the ICO expects reviews to be completed within 20 working days of receipt.
If you have any further questions during this time do let me know.
Kind regards,
Zoe
Zoe Hughes
Information Access
London Fire Brigade
169 Union Street London SE1 0LL
T 020 8555 1200
E [email address]
london-fire.gov.uk
Ms Ness
Jo Fox has passed me your email of 2 September 2020 having confirmed that
you would like me to conduct a review of our handling of your Freedom of
Information request. I would like to apologise for the delay in responding
to your request; the Brigade is currently dealing with a large volume of
information requests and we are struggling to deal with these as quickly
as we would like.
I am the Brigade’s Head of Information Management (and Data Protection
Officer) and I am responsible for the management of requests under data
protection and freedom of information law. It is my role to undertake
reviews of the handling of requests when the requestor is not satisfied
with the Brigade’s initial response.
You have asked me to review Ms Hughes response to your request under the
Freedom of Information Act (our ref: FOIA5134.1).
In your initial request (FOIA5134.1) you asked for the full disclosure of
fifteen Brigade policies. In her response to you, Ms Hughes advised that
two were cancelled policies, two were fully disclosed and two were
disclosed with redactions and the remaining nine were not disclosed with
the Brigade relying on FOIA exemption Section 24 – Safeguarding National
Security.
In your email of 9 September requesting a review you asked: “I am happy
for you to redact to whatever extent you need to, even where it means the
vast majority of the document is redacted but would encourage you to
redact as opposed to refuse disclosure.”
I have now had the opportunity to review your initial FOIA (5134.1)
request and having regard to your suggestion to “… redact as opposed to
refuse disclosure”, I have concluded that, in the public interest, it
would be better to disclose to you some aspects of the policies previously
exempt. For the nine policies not originally provided, I am happy to
provide you with the cover sheet (which includes a contents list so you
can see what the policy covers), and the document history sheet (so you
can see the updating history of the policies and the currency). The
decision to now redact these nine policies has been made with the
consideration of transparency and the public interest in understanding how
we prepare and respond to major incidents. I think this goes some way to
provide reassurance that the Brigade has appropriate policies in place.
I uphold the original decisions made by Ms Hughes to redact two policies
from full disclosure. I will now consider the public interest arguments in
maintaining this exemption, and the new exemption to the nine policies
previously withheld.
The current UK threat level has been increased to severe meaning an attack
is highly likely. I understand that when we use the term ‘highly likely’
this indicates that there is a higher probability of an attack or an
incident happening. With this in mind, a full disclosure of our policies
that contain details of operational response planning and locations of
specific commands could undermine the effectiveness of a response by the
Brigade and our emergency partners if this information was to be used to
try and disrupt our responses to critical incidents. The nine policies
requested and previously withheld but now supplied, contain information
(redacted) that if disclosed could be used to compromise the Brigade’s
ability to respond to major incidents and effectively impact on wider
public safety.
Please find the following nine redacted policies – as set out below –
attached to this email:
Policy Subject
259 Terrorist related incidents
261 Public order and civil disturbance procedure
263 Major incident procedure
483 Hazmat/CBRN(E) Rapid Response Team
522 Incidents involving chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear
(CBRN(E)) materials on the London Underground and other sub-surface
railway networks
594 Issue, control and use of airside passes at stations adjacent to
licensed aerodromes
664 Airwave digital main-scheme radio
785 Incidents involving Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear
(CBRN) materials
833 GT (SOR), Palestra, ELT, CT-POR’s
This concludes my review (our ref: FOIA5134.2) of the handling of your
information request.
You have the right to ask the Information Commissioner for a decision as
to whether the Brigade has dealt with your request in accordance with the
requirements of the FOIA. You must apply promptly to the Information
Commissioner's Office at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire,
SK9 5AF. There is advice of the ICO website about how to make a complaint
- Information Commissioner’s website [1]www.ico.uk
David Wyatt
Head of Information Management
London Fire Brigade
169 Union Street London SE1 0LL
T: 020 8555 1200 x30352
M: 07775 826 404
E: [email address]
london-fire.gov.uk
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
Sally Adams left an annotation ()
Did you read the response from LFB when they received your request? "Please note, given the current situation with the Coronavirus, this may be outside of the normal, expected timeframe for a FOI response."
I think that answers your question