Stockport Council says every approach I make to the Council must be through the FOI Officer
Dear Stockport Borough Council,
I know this is not a FOI request but the Council has made up the rule that I can only contact the Council through the FOI Officer (I think so no-one inadvertently tells me an inconvenient truth).
Please ask Councillor Weldon, Donna Sager and Andrew Webb to meet me at the site of the proposed school at 08.45 on a school day, so I can explain the already dangerous traffic situation there even before the 550 pupil school and nursery,midwifery drop in sessions, baby clinic/group, health visitor drop in sessions, speech and language support for children, childminder network and drop in facility with access to training, creche, parents/carers' attendance sessions, parents/carers' support base offering parenting courses and Family Learning Support, parent and child play sessions and information sessions on childcare, jobs and benefits are in operation.
The Chief Highways Engineer, Nick Whelan, stated in an email 3 days before the planning decision meeting that the drop off facility was not big enough and proposed a Grampian condition turning circle as the solution. As the Council failed to include the turning circle land in the compulsory purchase order to alleviate the need for a public inquiry (although one should have been held anyway because the Council was fraudulently taking part of someone's garden), it will be years, if it is passed at all, before the turning circle could be operational.
So, when the first child dies in a traffic accident, I will be able to show this posting to the lawyers represting the grieving parents (and I am one myself) and sue the above mentioned Councillor Weldon, Donna Sager and Andrew Webb for corporate manslaughter.
I look forward to your reply and their site visit.
With warmest best wishes
Yours faithfully,
Sheila Oliver
Freedom of Information, Environmental and Human Rights Campaigner
Dear Stockport Borough Council,
I have requested that Councillor Weldon and Andrew Webb, the people responsible, have a site visit to the proposed school and see how dangerous the traffic situation is and how their plans to deal with this cannot be implemented for several years due to the Council's failure to include all the land needed in the compulsory purchase order to bypass the need for a public inquiry into the loss of public open space. The situation they are creating is so dangerous that children will die.
They won't answer any council meeting questions on the issue and despite the Information Commission saying they should, they won't answer any FOI questions either.
I have been told by the Council to make all contact via the FOI Officer, which is what I am trying to do.
Kind regards
Yours faithfully,
Sheila Oliver
Dear Mrs Oliver,
This does not relate to an FOI request; therefore an internal review
cannot be carried out. The Council will only respond to requests for
information via What Do They Know.com; it is not appropriate to use it
for general correspondence.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Dear Ms Naven
It is impossible to contact the Council any other way - no questions are accepted in council meetings and no ordinary emails are responded to on this subject, so there is no other way forward. This is what I have been told to do by the Council - make all contact via the FOI Officer and this is a FOI site. The Information Commission has said you should answer questions but the Council is ignoring that. If you give a response to my request by normal email, then I am happy to post up on this site that a response has been received and what it is. I didn't make this rule of only contact via the FOI Officer - Stockport Council did for some obscure reason which I think is to do with the control of what information escapes the Council - so no ordinary council officer accidently lets the truth slip.
If you want an actual FOI request then: May I see any documents which deal with my request for Andrew Webb and Executive Councillor Mark Weldon to observe for themselves the dangerous traffic situation the Council will be causing at the proposed Harcourt Street new school on a former toxic waste dump.
With warmest best wishes
Yours sincerely,
Sheila Oliver
Dear Mrs Oliver,
Thank you for your request for information below which has been given
reference FOI 2952. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your
request.
Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days. If
there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to
provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if
you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they
amount to less than £10.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Dear Stockport Borough Council,
Thank you for sending your refusal to my home email address. I am more than happy for you to post the reply on this website. It was, of course, a blanket refusal for Councillor Weldon and Mr Webb to even visit the site. Stockport councillors, and there are only 63, cost us almost £1 million pa, they get £23,000 worth of free meals and free parking, but Councillor Weldon can't come to look at the danger his proposals will cause young people.
I have got proof via the attachment you sent me of the names of the council officers who are refusing to allow any information to be disclosed, which will be quite useful to me.
Kind regards
Sheila Oliver
Dear Mrs Oliver,
The response to your request, which you have agreed can be posted on this
site, is attached.
I am unsure why you have replied to us using the `internal review'
function on this site when the information you requested has been
provided; you do not appear to asking for an internal review so it will
not be treated as such.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Dear Stockport Borough Council,
Thank you for sending your refusal to my home email address. I am
more than happy for you to post the reply on this website. It
was,
of course, a blanket refusal for Councillor Weldon and Mr Webb to
even visit the site. Stockport councillors, and there are only
63,
cost us almost £1 million pa, they get £23,000 worth of free
meals
and free parking, but Councillor Weldon can't come to look at the
danger his proposals will cause young people.
I have got proof via the attachment you sent me of the names of
the
council officers who are refusing to allow any information to be
disclosed, which will be quite useful to me.
Kind regards
Sheila Oliver
Dear FOI Officer,
Thank your reply. Stockport Council, not me, insisted that every issue is to be a FOI issue addressed through the FOI Officer. I can't ask public meeting questions on the subject on the grounds of an Information Commission decision that I was vexatious based on information sent them by Stockport Council. I believe it is illegal to ban council meeting questions on FOI grounds. I simply want to hold highly paid executive councillors and senior council officers to account. When and if the first child dies in the dangerous traffic conditions, then I shall ensure corporate manslaughter charges are brought. When the first child develops cancer from the contamination or the venting of asbestos fibres into the school, I shall ensure corporate manslaughter charges are brought.
Stockport Council has made every issue a FOI matter, which I suspect it will come to regret. That is why I am asking for an internal review of yet another refusal.
Yours sincerely,
Sheila Oliver
Dear Mrs Oliver,
Your FOI request (ref 2952) asked for copies of emails generated as a
result of your request to meet with a councillor and a member of staff.
You were provided with this information i.e. a copy of the only email
generated; the Council did not refuse to provide you with any information
in response to your FOI request. On this basis, I do not understand your
request for an internal review on the basis that we have refused to
provide you with information in this case.
Unless you provide valid grounds for an internal review of this request,
the Council considers that this case is now closed. If you require further
general information about the FOI Act and the internal review process,
please visit the Information Commissioner's website at [1]www.ico.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
Hi Chris
I didn't think it was miscategorised but I will re-consider following your comments.
Kind regards
Sheila
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
Hi Chris
I don't think I have miscategorised this but I am willing to listen if you think I have. The Council's response is the normal stalling one which says nothing. I represent over 800 people, which I can prove. They say I have made 247 requests over a 5 year period. This equates to 0.06175 requests per year for everyone I represent. I specifically asked about the road safety of the children who will attend this dangerous school. As council meeting questions have been banned under the FOIA (presumably illegally) and as every approach I make has to be through the FOI Officer and as they tried to leave lead, asbestos and arsenic in situ on the school site, and as they are £5 million adrift on their funding - all as I have said repeatedly over 5 years - then I don't think their non-answer counts as an answer at all.
If I am wrong in this, I am willing to re-consider.
Kind regards
Sheila
Chris left an annotation ()
Your request was here:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/st...
The information was provided here:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/st...
That is very clearly not a refusal. I'll be contacting the WDTN team to get them to reclassify the request.
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
Hi Chris
OK, if that is what you think is right.
Kind regards
Sheila
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
Is my local MP Andrew Stunell having a laugh here? I repeatedly
asked him to make Stockport Council reply to questions, which they
have avoided for about four years:-
http://www.libdemvoice.org/andrew-stunel...
I shall ask him again for help and post his response, or lack of
it, on this site.
Have a look at this frightening You Tube clip of the brown asbestos
"experts" languidly and unscienficially removing brown asbestos
from the school site:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0rCPnP5H9o
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
I don't think that Andrew Stunell link worked. Try this:-
http://www.libdemvoice.org/andrew-stunel...
alan m dransfield (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
The ICO are in serious breach of their own Polices and Procedures, the FOI Act 2000, the Data Act and in their recent ICO decison aginst Sheila Oliver FS 50316377.
The ICO have included personal details within their decison which is ILLEGAL.
Another majopr BLUNDER by the ICO
Chris left an annotation ()
I don't see any personal information in the DN. The only names I see are parties to previous litigation (where the Tribunal hasn't ordered anonymity), the name of the manager at the ICO, and that they've identified the complainant as female. If you find that last one a problem, write to the ICO advising that they adopt the long-standard singular 'they', but otherwise it's a fault of the English language.

Alex Skene left an annotation ()
Just on the personal data issue in the ICO DN - all FOI requests made via WhatDoTheyKnow are explicitly in the public domain, with the requester's consent and knowledge.
Follow-on Decision Notices often contain links or pointers back to the requests on WhatDoTheyKnow to show the full correspondence trail, so there should be limited expectations of privacy in them.
Sheila Oliver (Account suspended) left an annotation ()
Hi
I am happy for anything to be in the public domain. There is too much secrecy. I am proud of how I try to expose what is going on. Had it not been for me 550 primary school pupils and 78 babies would be sitting now in a school on unremediated toxic waste.
There are serious financial issues also to be raised. I am going to appeal this decision At the last minute Stockport Council had to borrow circa £5 million to pay for this school when they claimed all through they had the money.
This is a long process, as we have found with the Guardian's expose of Mr Murdoch's companies. It takes years for the truth to come out.
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Chris left an annotation ()
Miscategorised - looks like the information requested halfway down consists of two documents, and they're both attached.