Are you not following the news? Do you think your FOI request is the loophole no one has thought about?

This request was submitted at 08:38 on 31 Jan 2022 after days of prevarication by Johnson and his government suggesting they did not have the report themselves.

Later during the day of 31 Jan, news broke about the investigation by the Met . Unsurprisingly that has been used as an excuse to withhold the information.

The Cabinet Office's response positively confirms that under s.1 they hold the requested information.

Doesn't the response state that they do not hold the requested information?

I totally overlooked that small word "not" in the reply, because it has not logical place to be there.

My understanding is that the full report was about to be published when it was given to the Met who had previously said they don't investigate retrospective crime (ie, they only investigate crime happening in the present or future).

Sue Grey's _update_ (not the full report, but was disclosed 31/1/22 shortly after I submitted my request) is here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...
Section §14 explains that the Met were now investigating and therefore, "it is not possible at present to provide a meaningful report".

It's hard to see how an argument that information may not be disclosed because the police have finally been persuaded to investigate crimes committed under their very noses is compatible with a claim that the information doesn't actually exist unless we have somehow discovered quantum politics and this is Schroedinger's report.

Do the CO hold the report? The terms state that the PM asked the Cabinet Secretary to carry out investigations. The effect of FOIA s.3(2)(b) is they 'hold' this information even if Sue Grey hasn't handed the PM neatly printed and bound hard-copy yet.

If the Cabinet Office continue to insist that they don't hold a report which it has been argued cannot be disclosed pending the outcome of the police investigation I will ask the Information Commissioner to consider whether, on the balance of probabilities, they hold the information.

If the Cabinet Office wish to argue that the information is held but exempt, for example under s.31 - law enforcement - then they must state the exemption they rely on, explain why they consider it is engaged and why the public interest lies in burying this information (until after the local elections).

I don't expect to succeed, but we have to keep making life as uncomfortable as possible for those who seek to pervert and destroy our precious democracy.

Please let me know how this progresses. Thanks.

I submitted a FOI asking for information relating to specific events cited in the Sue Grey report on 31-Jan-2022. The Cabinet Office have now extended the deadline by 20 days to complete a public interest test as a result of using a Section 31 exemption.