Dear Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council,

Following concerns raised by a whistleblower, Wirral Council's auditors were commissioned to write two reports to Wirral Council looking into the whistleblower's concerns.

The executive summary of the Grant Thornton report into the BIG (business investment grants) was published on your website http://democracy.wirral.gov.uk/documents... .

However another report was also commissioned into the ISUS (Intensive Startup Support) program again from Grant Thornton.

Please could you supply:-

(a) a copy of Grant Thornton's report to Wirral Council into the ISUS program,

(b) if this is not possible the Executive Summary of Grant Thornton's report into the ISUS program or

(c) if neither is possible in full then a redacted copy of both the above (with reasons behind the redactions)?

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

John Brace

Dear Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'report on ISUS grants program'.

Thank you for your response to my request for the ISUS report produced by the Council's auditors Grant Thornton.

For the purposes of clarity and to prevent any misunderstandings I include a copy of s.30 (apart from ss.6 which only applies to Scotland) in my request for an internal review, which is below.

30 Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities.

(1)Information held by a public authority is exempt information if it has at any time been held by the authority for the purposes of—

(a)any investigation which the public authority has a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained—

(i)whether a person should be charged with an offence, or

(ii)whether a person charged with an offence is guilty of it,

(b)any investigation which is conducted by the authority and in the circumstances may lead to a decision by the authority to institute criminal proceedings which the authority has power to conduct, or

(c)any criminal proceedings which the authority has power to conduct.

(2)Information held by a public authority is exempt information if—

(a)it was obtained or recorded by the authority for the purposes of its functions relating to—

(i)investigations falling within subsection (1)(a) or (b),

(ii)criminal proceedings which the authority has power to conduct,

(iii)investigations (other than investigations falling within subsection (1)(a) or (b)) which are conducted by the authority for any of the purposes specified in section 31(2) and either by virtue of Her Majesty’s prerogative or by virtue of powers conferred by or under any enactment, or

(iv)civil proceedings which are brought by or on behalf of the authority and arise out of such investigations, and

(b)it relates to the obtaining of information from confidential sources.

(3)The duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to information which is (or if it were held by the public authority would be) exempt information by virtue of subsection (1) or (2).

(4)In relation to the institution or conduct of criminal proceedings or the power to conduct them, references in subsection (1)(b) or (c) and subsection (2)(a) to the public authority include references—

(a)to any officer of the authority,
(b)in the case of a government department other than a Northern Ireland department, to the Minister of the Crown in charge of the department, and
(c)in the case of a Northern Ireland department, to the Northern Ireland Minister in charge of the department.

[F1(5)In this section—
“criminal proceedings” includes service law proceedings (as defined by section 324(5) of the Armed Forces Act 2006);
“offence” includes a service offence (as defined by section 50 of that Act).]

Firstly I will point out that this investigation was not conducted by Wirral in its role as a public authority but by the Council's auditors Grant Thornton Limited. Wirral Council is also not deciding to institute criminal proceedings, therefore the report cannot be classed as falling with ss. 1(a)(i) or (ii) you are leaving this decision to the police instead.

Guidance here on the application of the s.30 exemption available here http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/info... on the Ministry of Justice's website states "Section 30 can only be relied on by an authority which itself exercises one of the investigation or litigation functions that are specified in the exemption." and "Section 30 is a qualified exemption and is therefore subject to the public interest test."

As the investigation was done by Grant Thornton Ltd (not by Wirral Council) and a decision to charge (if one is made) would be made by Merseyside Police in conjunction with the Crown Prosecution Service it would seem that Wirral Council has neither exercised an investigation or litigation function.

Part 1(b) and 1(c) do not apply as Wirral Council has decided that this decision be made instead by the police/CPS.

Therefore 2(a)(i) and 2(a)(ii) also do not apply either.

Section 2(a)(iii) refers to 31(2) which in this case states "to the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law", yet if the investigation had determined this then why wouldn't Wirral Council institute civil or criminal proceedings itself?

Civil proceedings have not been mentioned, therefore ss. 2(4) does not apply.

The rest of s.30 also doesn't give any grounds for refusing the request.

S.30 is a qualified objection subject to a public interest test. Therefore Wirral Council is obliged to conduct a public interest test of the factors in favour of and against disclosure.

The reasons given in refusing this request do not say a public interest test was conducted and don't give any reasons in favour of disclosure. The investigations into the BIG/ISUS programs by Grant Thornton have so far cost £50,000 and it would increase confidence in the investigation process if there was more transparency especially as (as has already been acknowledge in relation to the BIG report) that a procedural failure or mismanagement occurred meaning there is a public interest in holding Wirral Council accountable for this.

The investigation has concluded by Grant Thornton sending its report to Wirral Council. Therefore there is a public interest in knowing how the decision to refer it to Merseyside Police was reached by Wirral Council.

I am therefore requesting an internal review of the decision to refuse my request on grounds that the information was exempt under s.30, because your response does not include details of or refer to a public interest test and there are many arguments in favour of disclosure as outlined above, which have by your response not even been considered when applying this exemption.

I look forward to your response in the near future.

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

Yours faithfully,

John Brace