We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Ge off Pickering please sign in and let everyone know.

Powers to exclude or limit the function of an Elected Member

We're waiting for Ge off Pickering to read a recent response and update the status.

Ge off Pickering

Dear Scarborough Borough Council,

The SBC Chief Executive has recently disbarred an Elected Member of Scarborough Borough Council from entering council premises, emailing, telephoning or communication with council staff.

Given this action severely limits a Member from performing the duties they are elected to do and summarily curtailed the legal rights of an Elected Member

Please provide me with a the following general information

I wish to stress I do not seek any information relating to this individual case or to any individual. Simply the legal basis for such action.

The exact legal authority and powers that can be exercised to exclude and or limit the function of elected member.

Who are those powers are vested in

What limits are this to this authority

What circumstances those powers can be used

What procedures must be followed in exercising those powers

What standards are required to meet.

What are the procedures for appeal or challenge to the exercising of these powers.

Yours faithfully,

Geoff Pickering

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

 

Email Address: [FOI #478370 email]

FOI Request Reference: FOIA5727 - Powers to exclude or limit the function
of Elected Members

Thank you for your written communication of 17/04/2018

Your request has been referred to the responsible officer and a response
should be made within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days from the
date of receipt.

In some circumstances a fee may be payable and if that is the case, we
will let you know. A fees notice will be issued to you, and you will be
required to pay before we will proceed to deal with your request.

Please ensure that any further communication in relation to this matter is
sent by you to the Freedom of Information Officer at the below address
quoting the reference FOIA5727 in all communications.

Yours sincerely,

Freedom of Information Officer

 

Freedom of Information Officer

Legal and Democratic Services

Scarborough Borough Council

e:  [1][Scarborough Borough Council request email]

t: 01723 232323

f: 0870 2384159

w:  [2]www.scarborough.gov.uk

 

 

 

[3][IMG]

DISCLAIMER

This email (and any files transmitted with it) may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken is prohibited and may be unlawful - you should therefore return the email to the sender and delete it from your system. Any opinions expressed are those of the author of the email, and do not necessarily reflect those of Scarborough Borough Council. Please note: Incoming and outgoing e-mail messages are routinely monitored for compliance with our policy on the use of electronic communications.This email has been checked for the presence of computer viruses, but please rely on your own virus-checking procedures.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Scarborough Borough Council request email]
2. http://www.scarborough.gov.uk/
3. http://www.scarborough.gov.uk/energyswit...

Neil Wilby left an annotation ()

This is an information request in which disclosure will have much wider consequences than a single incident involving one council. To be clear, I am not a lawyer, but a card-carrying journalist with a working knowledge of media law, information and data law, and public policy.

It seems to me, at least, that there would have to be a seismic shift of power for a local authority to usurp the dictates of Parliament. But this is Scarborough Council, of course, who have a regrettable history of, and reputation for, disregarding statute over such as Data Protection Act, Freedom of Information Act, Localism Act, Defamation Act, to name but four.

This request, together with the backstory, has the makings of a national newspaper story. I am hopeful of being the reporter to break it.

Ge off Pickering

Dear Scarborough Borough Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Scarborough Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Powers to exclude or limit the function of an Elected Member'.

I am asking for an internal review to remove the need for referral to the Information Commisioner and to prevent further serious consequences.

The request for information is reasonable and pertinent. There are no legitimate exemptions or reasons for delay in responding.

The information I seek is entirely about process and powers exercised by the Council and clearly indicates that I want no information about an individual or a particular case.

This is not a commercial matter and there is no commercial sensitivity.

The powers have recently been exercised so the Council can not claim not to hold the information or that it is too complicated, time consuming or expensive to retrieve.

The issue raised is an extremely serious matter relating to interference with the democratic process which appears to be illegal and possibly could result in criminal charges. The Council have this opportunity to allay/ dismiss those concerns by providing the information requested.

The Council have quite separately been notified that there is press interest in the information due to the serious nature of the question.

It is therefore all the more concerning that this FOi is being ignored.

It is noted that a similar question was asked of Cllr John Nock, the Portfolio Holder responsible for legal matters, by Independent Cllr Vanda Inman at the meeting of the Full Council on Monday 14th May.

It was astonishing to see the Chief Executive step in to effectively block a political question in an exclusively political forum and about his own conduct and actions. The Chief Executive not being a Member of the Council and Officers are excluded form political activity his actions amount to a further interference in the democratic process.

This gives rise to more serious concerns regarding the governance of the Council and indicates the political leadership are content and possibly complicit in this matter.

Given the serious nature of this request and the fact that the Full Council meeting has heightened and added to the concerns. I strongly advise the Council to meet their obligations under the Freedom of Information Act and provide the information requested without further delay and without use of spurious and inappropriate exemptions.

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

Yours faithfully,

Geoff Pickering

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

 

Thank you for your request for information which has been dealt with under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

 

Request

 

You requested the following information:

 

The SBC Chief Executive has recently disbarred an Elected Member of
Scarborough Borough Council from entering council premises, emailing,
telephoning or communication with council staff.

 

Given this action severely limits a Member from performing the duties they
are elected to do and summarily curtailed the legal rights of an Elected
Member

 

Please provide me with a the following general information

 

I wish to stress I do not seek any information relating to this individual
case or to any  individual. Simply the legal basis for such action.

 

The exact legal authority and powers that can be exercised to exclude and
or limit the function of elected member.

 

Who are those powers are vested in

 

What limits are this to this authority

 

What circumstances those powers can be used

 

What procedures must be followed in exercising those powers

 

What standards are required to meet.

 

What are the procedures for appeal or challenge to the exercising of these
powers.

 

Response

 

Earlier today you requested a review of the Council’s response. Although
you have not specified the basis on which you are requesting a review, and
on the assumption that this is because you have not received a response as
yet, today is in fact the final day of the 20 working day period for
response. Alternatively, if you are requesting a review of a response that
you have not yet received this cannot be accepted.

 

It is also noted that you have stressed that you are not seeking any
information relating to a decision recently taken by the Chief Executive
in relation to an individual member, but are instead seeking the legal
basis for such a decision. In your ‘request for review’ received earlier
today you also state:

 

“The information I seek is entirely about process and powers exercised by
the Council and clearly indicates that I want no information about an
individual or a particular case.“

 

Those statements aside, the decision of the Chief Executive to which you
refer has been publicised in local media. Given that the individual member
to which that decision relates is the only member of the Council to whom
that decision applies, it can very easily be said that such information
would be third party personal data. After all, the only reason that you
have made your request is because of the decision as it relates to that
member. It is also to be remembered that any information disclosed
pursuant to a FOIA request is disclosed into the public domain, and not
just to the applicant. It is this perspective that must be taken when
considering whether any exemptions apply. That said, the Council is not
seeking to rely on the exemption for personal data under the FOIA.

 

You will be aware that section 1 of the FOIA provides a general right of
access to information held by public authorities. A person making a
request is entitled to be informed whether the public authority holds
information of the description requested, and if so, to have that
information communicated to them (subject to any exemptions).

 

Your request seeks detailed legal advice about powers arising from
legislation and case law, or in other words an explanation of their
application and interpretation, rather than being a request as to whether
specified information is held etc.

 

There would be no reason for the Council to hold this information unless
there had at some point prior to your request been a requirement for
written legal advice about those powers and their application. Insofar as
the Council holds any recorded information that falls within your request,
it is the Council’s position that it would in any case be exempt from
disclosure under section 42 of the FOIA, which so far as is relevant
states:

 

(1)    Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional
privilege…could be maintained in legal proceedings is exempt information.

 

So as to assist, there are 2 types of legal professional privilege (LPP) -
the first is litigation privilege; and the second is advice privilege.

 

The ICO’s guidance on the application of section 42 of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA) provides a concise explanation of the 2 types
of LPP. The guidance can be accessed here:

 

[1]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...

 

Paragraphs 7 to 11 of the guidance state:

 

7. In the Bellamy decision, the Tribunal acknowledged that there are two
types of privilege within the concept of LPP:

 

·         litigation privilege; and,

·         advice privilege

 

Litigation privilege

 

8. Litigation privilege applies to confidential communications made for
the purpose of providing or obtaining legal advice about proposed or
contemplated litigation. There must be a real prospect or likelihood of
litigation, rather than just a fear or possibility. For information to be
covered by litigation privilege, it must have been created for the
dominant (main) purpose of giving or obtaining legal advice, or for
lawyers to use in preparing a case for litigation. It can cover
communications between lawyers and third parties so long as they are made
for the purposes of the litigation.

 

9. Litigation privilege can apply to a wide variety of information,
including advice, correspondence, notes, evidence or reports.

 

Advice privilege

 

10. Advice privilege applies where no litigation is in progress or
contemplated. It covers confidential communications between the client and
lawyer, made for the dominant (main) purpose of seeking or giving legal
advice.

 

11. The legal adviser must have given advice in a legal context; for
instance, it could be about legal rights, liabilities, obligations or
remedies. Advice from a lawyer about financial matters or on an
operational or strategic issue is unlikely to be privileged, unless it
also covers legal concerns, such as advice on legal

remedies to a problem.

 

The reference in the above excerpt to the ‘Bellamy decision’ is a
reference to the appeal by a Mr Bellamy against a decision of the ICO
relating to LPP. The judgment can be accessed here:

 

[2]http://informationrights.decisions.tribu...

 

I refer to paragraphs 8 to 11 inclusive of this judgment for further
explanation about LPP.

 

It is the Council’s position that advice privilege would apply to any
recorded information falling within your request.

 

There is a strong public interest inherent in the exemption due to the
importance of the principle behind LPP (which is fundamental to the
administration of justice and the legal system). LPP aims to safeguard
openness in all communications between client and lawyer to ensure access
to full and frank legal advice. There must be an equally strong and
compelling public interest in overriding this fundamental legal principle
before disclosure of any information to which LPP applies can happen,
which is absent in the circumstances. This is particularly so if the
request is nothing to do with an “individual or a particular case” as
stated in your request for review. For clarity, even if the request were
taken to be in relation to an “individual or a particular case”, the
public interest would not be strong enough to override the public interest
in maintaining the exemption and the principle of LPP. Any public interest
would be more akin to public curiosity.

 

Review

 

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
request and wish to make a complaint or request a review of our decision,
you should write to Freedom of Information, Scarborough Borough Council,
Town Hall, St Nicholas Street, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO11 2HG  or
email [3][Scarborough Borough Council request email].

                

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the
Information Commissioner’s Office cannot make a decision unless you have
exhausted the complaints procedure provided by Scarborough Borough
Council. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9
5AF | Tel: [4]01625 545745 | Fax: [5]01625 524510 | Web:
[6]www.ico.org.uk |

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Freedom of information

Scarborough Borough Council

 

show quoted sections

Ge off Pickering

Dear Scarborough Borough Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Scarborough Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Powers to exclude or limit the function of an Elected Member'.

I thank you for your much belated response to my request for information and confirmation that you have calculated and chosen to wait for the last possible moment to reply.

The Council has refused to provide the information on the grounds that it is privileged legal advice, that there is a real prospect or likelihood of litigation for which the council is preparing and that disclosure of the information is not in the public interest.

I am therefore asking for an internal review, as the request has been incorrectly refused; the exemption cited does not apply to the request.

This LPP exemption within the Freedom Of Information Act is extremely specific and is limited as to where it applies, as set out in clear guidelines on its appropriate use, a small and highly selective part of which you have quoted in your response.
The purpose of the exemption is to protect the legal privilege of the lawyer/client relationship but does not exempt requests for information relating to legal matters or powers exercised by the Council. It applies only to requests for information regarding legal advice sought or received.

The information requested is not in this category.

The request does not seek

“detailed legal advice about powers arising from legislation and case law, or in other words an explanation of their application and interpretation, rather than being a request as to whether specified information is held etc.”

I have made no request for information relating to advice given or received, privileged or otherwise. I have no interest in whether the Chief Executive asked for or received legal advice nor do I ask for any information as to what that advice was, should any have been sought.

Providing what has been requested does not reveal any privileged information as it gives no indication as to whether powers used were in accordance with any advice or even that advice may or may not have been sought /given. The fact that the Chief Executive may have asked for advice is irrelevant.

You state that:
“There would be no reason for the Council to hold this information unless there had at some point prior to your request been a requirement for written legal advice about those powers and their application.”

This is not the case. Any competent council possesses and is fully aware of the powers they exercise. Those powers have been bestowed on it and are set out in legislation and are as such a are a matter of public record, not as a result of the Council having obtained legal advice. The information can be obtained from other sources which are independent of privileged information.

There is no legitimate reason for any Council to refuse information on what powers it has and has exercised

Legal advice would only need to be sought should the Council not have, or fear that it does not have, adequate legislative powers.

It can therefore be deduced that any council withholding such information has exceeded its competence as it does not possess the necessary authority or powers or it desires to resist challenge to the misuse of legitimate powers in order to continue to act unlawfully.

Indeed your invoking paragraph 8 indicates that such is the case

“8. Litigation privilege applies to confidential communications made for the purpose of providing or obtaining legal advice about proposed or contemplated litigation. There must be a real prospect or likelihood of litigation, rather than just a fear or possibility. For information to be covered by litigation privilege, it must have been created for the dominant (main) purpose of giving or obtaining legal advice, or for lawyers to use in preparing a case for litigation. It can cover communications between lawyers and third parties so long as they are made for the purposes of the litigation.”

The use of this exemption confirms that the Council must feel that there is real prospect of litigation and is preparing a case for litigation.

Assuming the Council is acting lawfully, any risk of litigation would be wholly avoided by providing the information requested as it would be unlikely if not impossible to litigate against the legitimate and lawful use of powers to disbar an elected member. There is no risk to a council confirming use of its legitimate powers.

A well-run authority would not unnecessarily waste taxpayers' money on unnecessary litigation when it could be so easily avoided.

I will therefore proceed on the same principle of deduction that you adopt in stating the information can only be held as a result of privileged advice.
Your reasons for refusal has indeed confirmed that the Council does not have the powers to act to disbar or limit Elected Members, that it is aware that it is acting illegally and is deliberately withholding information it should legally disclose in order to cover up and continue its actions.

You have stated that:

“the Council is not seeking to rely on the exemption for personal data under the FOIA.”

Although this clarification is appreciated, it is noted that this was the exemption used by the Chief Executive when refusing to answer the almost identical question raised by Cllr Inman at full council of the 14th May. There would appear to be an inconsistency in your reasons for refusing the information. The failure to maintain a consistent reason to refuse information indicates that the Council is intent on withholding the information rather than applying a legitimate exemption.

Given the conclusions that are naturally deduced from your response and that fact that there is no public interest whatsoever in maintaining the exemption, you may wish to reconsider your statement that:

“the public interest would not be strong enough to override the public interest in maintaining the exemption and the principle of LPP. Any public interest would be more akin to public curiosity.”

Should the Council wish to prove it is acting properly and correct any misconception in my conclusions it can of course chose to disclose the information sought.

I request that the Council give serious consideration to its position and reputation, review this request and provide the information requested in full without further delay or obfuscation.

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

Yours faithfully,

Geoff Pickering

Gwen Swinburn left an annotation ()

Dear Mr Pickering

May I say that there is considerable pubic interest in this foi from my network. You see we had no idea a Chief Executive could ban a Councillor from doing their job, contacting staff or even attending meetings.

As I understand you are only asking for the legal powers that the Chief Executive can rely on to ban a Councillor in such a fashion. It’s a simple question. Perhaps there is much prevarication because the powers are not available to the CX?

Gwen

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering,

 

Outcome of internal review

 

Reference FOIA 5727

 

We refer to your e-mail of 23rd May requesting a review of our response
dated 16th May to your request for information in your e-mail of 17th
April 2018.

 

We have now conducted a review and the decision has been upheld for the
following reasons:

 

We thank you for clarifying that you have not requested information
relating to the legal advice given or received. This being the case, it is
not necessary to apply the exemption under s42 of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

In your request you seek information as to the legal authority and powers
which can be exercised to exclude and or limit the functions of an elected
Member. Authorities and powers are contained within the Council’s
Constitution, which can be viewed at  
[1]https://democracy.scarborough.gov.uk/ieL...
  

 

In particular, the authority of the Chief Executive is set out in Article
11 and Part 3, Schedule 3 of the Constitution. You will see that this
includes overall corporate management and operational responsibility.

 

Powers are also vested in the Council under the general law, as are appeal
procedures, but this is information which is not recorded by the Council,
but is contained within various statutes, regulations, case law, statutory
guidance and so on.

 

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commission can be contacted at:

 

The Information Commissioner’s Office,

Wycliffe House,

Water Lane,

Wilmslow, Cheshire,

SK9 5AF

 

Tel: 01625 545745

Fax: 01625 524510

Web: www.ico.org.uk

 

 

Yours Sincerely,

Freedom of Information Team

 

 

Freedom of Information Officer

Legal and Democratic Services

Scarborough Borough Council

e:  [2][Scarborough Borough Council request email]

t: 01723 232323

f: 0870 2384159

w:  [3]www.scarborough.gov.uk

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Gwen Swinburn left an annotation ()

Dear Mr P

This response is concerning. First the numbers referred to appear to be in error. Secondly the Council does not refer to any part of the constitution that permits the CX to ban a Councillor from the premises, contact and from doing their job. Perhaps the foi response has been written to confuse and confound. A practice used when powers are not available to the CX.

Also it is a first that a local authority is relying on certain (unspecified) legal powers, with the addendum that the authority holds no records of those laws as all laws are written. It defies belief that this would be written in a response. But again I assume the generality is used here because there are no powers to ban a Councillor from the Council and doing their democratic duty.

Of course all this ‘confusion and obfuscation’ serves a purpose to delay, prevaricate and no doubt hope you will be put off from taking it further.

I expect the rest of the Councillors in Scarborough will have received instructions from the CX to try keep the lid on things.

In addition to the ICO an additional foi on emails to Cllrs & from on this Councillor’s banning might be informative.

Ge off Pickering

Dear FOI,

Thank you for your response.
I note that the Council have waived all exemptions previously applied and do not seek to invoke any further exemption. That the information is held by the Council and there is no cost issue in supplying it. In short you have agreed to supply the information requested.
Thank you for this.
I do however request an urgent clarification /internal review of the information supplied;

The references given do not apply the Chief Executive's /Councils powers to disbarring an Elected Member.

The part of the reference (schedule 3) I can not find and is non specific. Therefore it is not possible to determine the exact constitutional authority being cited.

Please provide me with the correct and specific references along with a direct link to the schedule.

With regard to the statement
"Powers are also vested in the Council under the general law, as are appeal
procedures, but this is information which is not recorded by the Council,
but is contained within various statutes, regulations, case law, statutory
guidance and so on."

The powers have been invoked and a decision made by the Council to exercise them. Your previous response confirms that legal advice has been sought, not only in relation to invoking those powers but to prepare a case for subsequent legal action.

It is therefore inconceivable given the unprecedented and extremely serious nature of the Council's action to disbar an Elected Member (and so disenfranchise the residents of their ward, denying them their right to representation) that there is no decision record or written documentation/ record containing the details of the powers and the statute, regulation, case, or guidance (and so on ) from which they are derived.

Nor is it credible , given the constitutional requirement for Officers to inform the Executive/Members of such decisions that The Leader of the Council and Portfolioholder, ad Group Leaders have not been fully briefed and provided with the information I request.

Nor is it credible that such a desision has not been discussed and therefor minuted by the Councils Senior Management Team.

Not to have a record would amount to unconstitutional, reckless and possibly illegal behaviour by the Chief Executive and the Legal/ Monitoring Officer. It would most certainly be procedurally irregular and raise questions as to failure to fulfil statutory duties and to maintain proper records.
Your answer, that this information is not recorded, therefore places the Council's most senior offices and Members at considerable personal and professional risk.

It is also inconceivable a well run Council would exercise such powers without knowing, and so having, a record of what they are.

I therefore ask you to consider the implications of the statement and provide you with the opportunity to correct any 'error'

Please provide details of the powers as must be recorded in line with this request for information.
Please note I require only the name of the actual statute, regulation, case, or guidance (and so on ) from which they are derived along with the specific reference relating to the power.

Yours sincerely,

Geoff Pickering

Ge off Pickering

Dear FOI,

On 13th June I responded to your internal review highlighting certain issues with your response, principle being that the council hold no record whatsoever relating to its authority to disbar an Elected Member.
I have received no acknowledgement or response.
I requested review/clarification and gave the Council the opportunity to correct any error.
Since then documents have been published which indicate the Council does indeed hold written records on this matter. It therefore appears that you are intentionally obstructing this request by
blocking or concealing records held by the authority, with the intention of preventing the disclosure of all, or any part, of the information to which I am entitled and to which you have now confirmed there is no exemption to its release.

I look forward to receiving a confirmation by return and the information requested within seven working days.

Yours sincerely,

Geoff Pickering

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

We are currently dealing with your correspondence and will provide a response shortly

Kind regards

FOI Officer

show quoted sections

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

I can confirm that your correspondence in respect to your internal review is currently being reviewed. So that we can consider your correspondence further, we would be grateful if you can provide us with further information in respect of the "documents" which have been published, which you have referred to in your correspondence.

Yours Sincerely

Freedom of Information Officer
Legal and Democratic Services
Scarborough Borough Council
e:  [Scarborough Borough Council request email]
t: 01723 232323
f: 0870 2384159
w:  www.scarborough.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Ge off Pickering

Dear FOI,

The documents referred to have no bearing on your ability to fulfill your obligations under the freedom of information act. You have no need to view them in order to provide the information requested.
Nor is the fact that they are in my possession any reason for delay.
The documents are SBC documents so already in your possession and are a proof that you do indeed hold the information requested.

As these will be used to check you have indeed provided ALL the information requested and may be evidence of deliberate obstruction , blocking etc as set out in my previous correspondence I have no intention of providing you with any indication whatsoever .

I suggest you be extremely thorough in your disclosure.

Yours sincerely,

Geoff Pickering

Ge off Pickering

Dear FOI,

Could you confirm whether or not you intend to reply to this FOI request and if so the date by which you will do so.

Yours sincerely,

Geoff Pickering

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

Thank you for your e-mails of 13th, 25th and 29th June. We apologise for the delay in replying to you.

As we stated in the Review e-mail, the powers and authority of the Chief Executive are contained within the Council’s Constitution in the parts specified and in the general law of local government. These are broad based – for instance, the Chief Executive, as Head of Paid Service, has overall responsibility for corporate management and operational matters.

We hope this clarifies the position for you.”

FOI Officer
Scarborough Borough Council
e: [Scarborough Borough Council request email] | t: 01723 232323 | w: www.scarborough.gov.uk     

Office: Town Hall, St Nicholas Street, Scarborough, YO11 2HG
Business Hours: 8.30 am to 5.00 pm, excluding bank holidays

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

Thank you for confirming that the information is held by the council and is contained only in the councils constitution.
This is a large and multi sectioned document. You have indicated the information is in several references in the document. Having now read the whole constitution in great detail I can find no clause or provision which seems at all relevant to the requested information.
Therefore, as is normal practice in such cases, where information requested is contained in large documents or is split over a number of entries, or not immediately apparent, could you please provide me with all the exact and specific references to the parts, causes and provisions of the constitution to which you refer.

Yours sincerely,

Geoff Pickering

FOI, Scarborough Borough Council

Dear Mr Pickering

The Council has completed the internal review of your FOIA request and remains satisfied that your request has been answered. If you remain dissatisfied you should contact the Information Commissioners Office via their website: https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/

FOI Officer
Scarborough Borough Council
e: [Scarborough Borough Council request email] | t: 01723 232323 | w: www.scarborough.gov.uk     

Office: Town Hall, St Nicholas Street, Scarborough, YO11 2HG
Business Hours: 8.30 am to 5.00 pm, excluding bank holidays

show quoted sections

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Ge off Pickering please sign in and let everyone know.

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org