Dear Mr Baxevanis

TfL Ref: FOI-1798-2122

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 11
November 2021.

We will aim to issue a response by 9 December 2021 in accordance with the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 and our information access policy.

We publish a substantial range of information on our website on subjects
including operational performance, contracts, expenditure, journey data,
governance and our financial performance. This includes data which is
frequently asked for in FOI requests or other public queries. Please check
[1]http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar... to see if this helps you.

We will publish anonymised versions of requests and responses on the
[2]www.tfl.gov.uk website. We will not publish your name and we will send
a copy of the response to you before it is published on our website.

In the meantime, if you would like to discuss this matter further, please
do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Eva Hextall

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Baxevanis

TfL Ref: FOI-1798-2122

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 11
November 2021, asking for information about RideLondon 2022 route.

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of
the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy.  I can
confirm that we hold some of the information you require. You asked:

I would like to request a copy of any agreements, memorandums of
understanding or similar documents documenting what has been agreed
between TfL and London Marathon Events Limited or The London Marathon
Charitable Trust.

A redacted copy of the agreement is attached.

The redactions have been made under section 43(2) of the Freedom of
Information Act, which permits the withholding of information that would
be likely to prejudice commercial interests. Material has been redacted
where release would be likely to prejudice TfL’s and London Marathon
Events Limited LME’s commercial position in future negotiations. Prejudice
would be likely to occur when we go out to tender for similar services in
the future because it would be likely to result in a clustering of bids
based on our negotiated commercial agreement. Disclosing this information
would affect our ability to negotiate deals with suppliers, sponsors and
landowners in the future, as our competitive edge would be prejudiced by
disclosure of this financial data.

The use of this exemption is subject to an assessment of the public
interest in relation to the disclosure of the information concerned. We
recognise the need for openness and transparency by public authorities,
particularly where the expenditure of public money is concerned, but in
this instance the public interest in ensuring that we are able to obtain
the best value for public money outweighs the general public interest in
increasing transparency of our processes.

Furthermore, in accordance with TfL’s obligations under Data Protection
legislation, some personal data has been removed, as required by section
40(2) of the FOI Act. This is because disclosure of this personal data
would be a breach of the legislation, specifically the first principle
which requires all processing of personal data to be fair and lawful. It
would not be fair to disclose this personal information when the
individuals have no expectation it would be disclosed and TfL has not
satisfied one of the conditions which would make the processing ‘fair’.

This exemption to the right of access to information is an absolute
exemption and not subject to an assessment of whether the public interest
favours use of the exemption.

I would also like to request, if it's not included in the above request,
any maps/plans or other visual or textual descriptions of the intended
route of the 100-mile challenge ride and stages one and two of the new
three-day UCI Women’s WorldTour road race, which will be held from 27 to
29 May.

We do not yet hold a map for the intended route because it is still
subject to consultation and agreement with the boroughs. When we have an
agreed route this will be published on the London Marathon event website
early next year.

If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable
to access it for any reason, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to
appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would
like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed.

Yours sincerely

Eva Hextall

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

show quoted sections

TfL Ref: IRV-052-2122

Thank you for your email which was received by Transport for London (TfL) on 9 December 2021.

You have stated that you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

A review will be conducted by an internal review panel in accordance with TfL’s Internal Review Procedure, which is available via the following URL:
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparenc...

Every effort will be made to provide you with a response by 11 January 2022. However, if the review will not be completed by this date, we will contact you and notify you of the revised response date as soon as possible.

In the meantime, if you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me.
Yours sincerely

Emma Flint
Principal Information Access Adviser
FOI Case Management Team
Transport for London

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Baxevanis

I am contacting you with regards to your email of 9 December 2021.
Following your email a review has been carried out by individuals who were
not involved in the handling of your request (the panel). You have
disputed the response which was provided to your FOI request
(FOI-1798-2122) and you further outlined the following -  "I also
understand that the route may not have been finalised so I am happy to
receive any information on the route options that have been discussed or
are being discussed at the time you receive my request. If you are already
consulting with boroughs around certain route options, please share these
with me, even if they're in a provisional/draft state. Otherwise please
confirm that no such proposed route options exist at the time of receiving
my request.”

Firstly please accept our sincere apologies that your original FOI request
was not fully addressed. As part of this review the panel have gone on to
consider the remainder of your request.

Following further discussions with TfL’s Head of Information, Design &
Partnerships and TfL’s Legal Manager for Commercial Law concerning the
information you seek surrounding route options that have been
provisionally discussed or consulted on, the panel have concluded that the
information you seek is exempt from disclosure in accordance with s43(2)
of the Freedom of Information Act – Commercial Interests.

When considering whether information is commercially sensitive we have to
take all factors into account regarding if disclosure would, or would be
likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including an
individual, a company, the public authority itself or any other legal
entity).

We also take in account that any disclosures made under the Act is not
just done so to an individual but ‘to the world at large’. As part of our
transparency commitments we publish all our FOI responses on the TfL
website. Even though copyright may be established, in reality we have
little control as to how the disclosed information is used once in the
public domain, either by the individual who requested it or other members
of the general public.

There are many circumstances in which a public authority might hold
information with the potential to prejudice commercial interests. The
outline of activities below indicates where this is most likely:

Procurement – many public authorities will be involved in the purchase of
goods and services and will hold a wide range of information relating to
this procurement process. This can include for example, information
provided during a tendering process about both successful and unsuccessful
tenders; details of a contract with a successful company and future
procurement plans.

Own commercial interests –some public authorities are allowed to engage in
commercial activities and many generate their own income. Any information
held about these activities will potentially fall within the scope of the
exemption.

In order to apply section 43(2), a public authority must satisfy itself
that disclosure of the information would, or would be likely to, prejudice
or harm the commercial interests of any person (this can include the
public authority holding it). This is known as the prejudice test. A
public authority must decide the likelihood of prejudice arising on the
facts of each case.

To explain further, RideLondon was previously delivered for TfL by a
consortium made up of London Marathon Events (LME) and a third events
company which used to take place in London and Surrey. When the contract
expired, and the consortium was disbanded, Surrey advised that they no
longer wished to host the event.  TfL then ran an open tender to appoint a
new delivery partner. LME were appointed and were required to identify a
new route and deliver the event.

When we are considering new routes we look primarily at two outer London
areas and throughout these considerations we held several meetings with
the relevant boroughs where many different routes are discussed and
developed.  Additionally LME spent a considerable amount of resource
developing multiple route options. Inevitably from these meetings, routes
become disregarded and some boroughs are eventually discounted.

We believe that if information regarding routes that have been considered
for the event and/or discounted at this stage were to be disclosed into
the public domain, this could be used by rival events companies that are
looking to run a mass participation cycling event in an attempt to
organise a similar event in direct rival competition with RideLondon, thus
prejudicing TfL’s commercial activities. The contract between TfL / LME is
a profit-sharing contract and the contract also specifies that the event
will be at no cost to TfL. If a competitor attempted to hold a similar
mass participation cycling event in and around London, this would likely
impact both TfL’s and LME’s ability to generate revenue from our event as
well as impact LME’s ability to run an event that is cost neutral to TfL.

The Panel have also considered the public interest in the use of section
43(2) and concluded that the balance lies in favour of withholding the
information. Although there is a strong public interest in openness, this
does not necessarily override all other arguments when considering the
public interest balance and whilst the public interest test will naturally
favour the release of information in the pursuit of openness and
transparency, when looking at disclosure requests we have to be mindful of
different commercial risks. RideLondon is currently a unique opportunity
to take part in a mass participation cycling event in and around London.
Should a competitor attempt to host a similar event it would dilute
sponsorship opportunities as prospective sponsors would have more than one
event that they could consider sponsoring, prejudice TfL’s ability to
generate revenue from this event and impact on TfL’s and LME’s ability to
deliver the event under the current contract. Therefore the panel consider
that disclosure of the information that you seek would likely hinder TfL’s
ability to obtain best value for public money for our commercial
activities and likely prejudice the commercial interests of the service
provider, which in this instance outweighs the public interest in
disclosure.

I hope the above response has provided a better clarity regarding the
information you seek, however if you are dissatisfied with the internal
review actions to date please do not hesitate to contact me or alternately
you can refer the matter to the independent authority responsible for
enforcing the Freedom of Information Act, at the following address:

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire SK9 5AF

A complaint form is also available on the ICO’s website
([1]www.ico.org.uk).

Yours sincerely

Emma Flint

Principal Information Access Adviser

FOI Case Management Team

Transport for London

[2][TfL request email]

This message has been scanned for malware by Forcepoint. [3]www.forcepoint.com

References

Visible links
1. http://www.ico.org.uk/
2. mailto:[TfL request email]
3. http://www.forcepoint.com/