Open 2014 Invitations

Natasha Eubank made this Freedom of Information request to Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

Dear Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council,

Please advise if tickets for the Open Golf Tournament 2014 have been made available to Wirral Council for corporate hospitality purposes?

If so, how many?

Please advise as to whom (Officers/Members/External Parties) these tickets have been assigned?

If tickets have been made available to Wirral Council, please confirm whether it is the intention of Wirral Council to offer a ticket to Steve Maddox, former CEO of Wirral Council

Yours faithfully,

Natasha

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

Good Afternoon

 

Thank you for your recent request made under the Freedom of Information
Act. Please find Wirral Borough Council’s responses alongside your
questions below.

 

I hope this information is of interest to you.

 

Kind regards,

 

Sent on behalf of

 

Tracy O'Hare

Information Management

Transformation and Resources

Wirral Council

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. You are free to
use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge.

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

show quoted sections

Dear InfoMgr, FinDMT,

Thanks Tracy

In the context of my FOIA request, 'made available' simply referred to whether Wirral Council had received Open 2014 tickets.

From your response, I can surmise that tickets were not given for free to Wirral Council, therefore please advise on what basis these tickets were given to the Council.

If there was a charge, please advise. Equally, any discounts given to the Council.

I understand that the request for information regarding charges/discounts will be considered as a new request, however I would presume that my clarification would enable the Council to respond to my original query?

Kindest Regards
Natasha

Yours sincerely,

Natasha Eubank

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

Good Afternoon

 

Thank you for your further email.

 

The Council paid for all tickets used during The Open. There was no
discount offered to the Council on these tickets and no additional cost
was incurred in relation to Corporate Hospitality.

 

The totals below include all tickets purchased for Councillors and members
of staff who attended in a professional capacity.

 

Wednesday 16^th July – 43 tickets @ £40 each

Thursday 17^th July – 54 tickets @ £75 each

Friday 18^th July – 55 tickets @ £75 each

Saturday 19^th July – 53 tickets @ £75 each

Sunday 20^th July – 46 tickets @ £75 each

 

I hope this information is of interest to you.

 

Kind regards,

 

Sent on behalf of

 

Tracy O'Hare

Information Management

Transformation and Resources

Wirral Council

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. You are free to
use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge.

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

 

show quoted sections

Dear InfoMgr, FinDMT,

Thanks very much indeed Tracy - If you could just complete the original query by identifying which Officers/Members were provided with the tickets, that would be sincerely appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

Natasha Eubank

Natasha Eubank left an annotation ()

£17, 320 spent on Open Tickets..............

InfoMgr, FinDMT, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council

1 Attachment

Good Afternoon

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Firstly, to clarify a previous response which was sent to you; the figures
provided for the total tickets purchased include those for Councillors,
staff and third parties, rather than just for Councillors and staff as
initially stated. I apologise for any confusion this may have caused.

 

In response to your enquiry, please find the list of Members who received
tickets for the Open Championship below.

 

Cllr R Abbey
Cllr T Anderson
Cllr C Blakeley
Cllr A Brighouse
Cllr J Crabtree
Cllr M Daniel
Cllr. B Davies
Cllr. G Davies
Cllr. D. M Elderton
Cllr. G. J Ellis
Cllr. P. J Hackett
Cllr. J Hale
Cllr P Hayes
Cllr. A. C Hodson
Cllr. K Hodson
Cllr T Johnson
Cllr. A Jones
Cllr. C Jones
Cllr. G Leech
Cllr. A McLachlan
Cllr. M McLaughlin
Cllr. D Mitchell
Cllr B Mooney
Cllr T Norbury
Cllr M Patrick
Cllr C Povall
Cllr L Reecejones
Cllr. L Rennie
Cllr. S. L Rowlands
Cllr. J Salter
Cllr T.A. Smith
Cllr. W Smith
Cllr T Smith
Cllr. H Smith
Cllr C Spriggs
Cllr J Stapleton
Cllr M Sullivan
Cllr J Walsh
Cllr G Watt
Cllr S Whittingham
Cllr S Williams
Cllr. P Williams
Cllr J Williamson

 

Please find attached a list of businesses and third parties who received
tickets. It has not been possible to provide a definitive list due to
on-going commercial negotiations between the Council and the organisations
in question.

 

The Council has considered the public interest test and believes that
disclosure of any such information would be likely to prejudice the
commercial interests of any person involved (a ‘person’ being an
individual, a company, the public authority itself or any other legal
entity). It is the Council’s opinion that the potential harm to the
interests of the authority and these organisations would outweigh the
public interest for disclosure.

 

Further guidance on Section 43 can be found on the Information
Commissioner’s Office website at [1]this link.

 

Regarding the names of the Council officers who attended in a professional
capacity, the Council has relied on section 40(2) of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. The Council can place reliance on this section when
disclosure of the information requested may breach The Data Protection Act
1998. 

The legislation specifies that Data Controllers, such as the Council,
have to comply with the 8 Data Protection principles.

 

The first principle, which is set out in Schedule 1 of the Act stats
that a Personal Data may only be processed where it is fair and lawful to
do so and where one of the conditions set out in Schedule 2 are
satisfied. I do not believe that any of the conditions in Schedule 2 are
met. 

 

To advise you further I have detailed Schedule 2 below:-

SCHEDULE 2 - CONDITIONS RELEVANT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLE:

PROCESSING OF ANY PERSONAL DATA 

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.

2. The processing is necessary-

(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is
a party, or

(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject  with a
view to entering into a contract.

3. The processing is necessary for compliance with any legal obligation
to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed
by contract.

4. The processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests
of the data subject.

5. The processing is necessary-

(a) for the administration of justice,

(b) for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or
under any enactment,

(c) for the exercise of any functions of the Crown, a Minister of
the Crown or a government department, or

(d) for the exercise of any other functions of a public nature
exercised in the public interest by any person.

6. - (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate
interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or
parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is
unwarranted  in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights
and freedoms  or legitimate interests of the data subject.

 

The Council has had regard to the legal precedent for the non-disclosure
of this information made on 7^th February 2014 by Lord Justice Moses in
the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in the case of Edem v. The
Information Commissioner & The Financial Services Authority (FSA) (Case
No: C3/2013/0791). The case involved the requested disclosure of the names
of three junior members of staff who had been involved in the handling of
Mr Edem’s complaint against the FSA regarding their regulation of Egg PLC.

 

In his judgement, Lord Justice Moses stated:

 

9. There is no dispute but that disclosure of the names would be
“processing” within s.1 of the Data Protection Act 1998. Nor was there any
dispute but that the names were data.

 

[…]

 

12. It seems to me beyond question that those living individuals could be
identified from a combination of their names and the documents emanating
from the Financial Services Authority which show that they were working
there in the capacity described by Rosalind Leaphard.

 

13. There is ample authority in the Court of the Justice of the European
Union that a person’s name, in conjunction with job-related information,
is their personal data. In Criminal Proceedings against Lindqvist
(C-101/01, [2003] ECR 1-12971) the court stated:-

“The term personal data used in Article 3.1 of Directive 95/46 covers,
according to the definition in Article 2(a) thereof, any information
relating to an identified or identifiable natural person. The term
undoubtedly covers the name of a person in conjunction with his telephone
co-ordinates or information about his working condition or hobbies.”

In Commission v Bavarian Lager (C-28/08 [2010] ECR 1-6055,) the Court
states:-

“[68]. It should be noted that in paragraph 104 the judgment under appeal,
the General Court, in examining Article 2(a) Regulation No. 45/2001, that
is to say the definition of the concept of single ‘personal data’,
correctly held that surnames and forenames may be regarded as personal
data.”

 

The Council is therefore adhering to this ruling and refusing this aspect
of your request due to the seniority of the officers in question and the
fact that they do not hold public facing jobs. There is therefore an
expectation that their privacy would be upheld.

 

You have the right under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act
2000  to ask for an internal review of the refusal to supply
the information requested. Please direct any request for an internal
review to [2][Wirral Borough Council request email].     

You also have the right to complain to the Information Commissioner should
you be dissatisfied with the outcome of any internal review. Contact
details can be found [3]here.

 

Kind regards,

 

Sent on behalf of

 

Tracy O'Hare

Information Management

Transformation and Resources

Wirral Council

 

This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be
protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. You are free to
use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you
are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for
example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may
involve licensing and the application of a charge.

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

show quoted sections

Mr P Harris left an annotation ()

When I first questioned on Roger Phillips phone-in on BBC Radio Merseyside (4 July) the existence of the council's Cheif Exec letter to all councillors inviting them to The Open the council's Press Officer refuted my claim. Now thanks to this FO I and others we are starting to get to the truth and taxpayer costs. I also have on good authority that one of the commercial organisations a local call centre business provided transport and hospitality to councillors. We must keep on challenging the obfuscation of this moribund Labour council.

nigel hobro left an annotation ()

Is that ASif Hamid and his The Contact Company? And did he do this out of the kindness of his heart? Should we not be worried about the roundabout of favours returned with our and erdf money.?