Report on Role of PCSOs

The request was refused by Cambridgeshire Constabulary.

Dear Cambridgeshire Constabulary,

Please could you release the final report of the recently concluded review into the role of PCSOs led by Chief Inspector James Sutherland.

--

Richard Taylor
Cambridge
http://www.rtaylor.co.uk

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

I have written a related article:

http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-...

--

Richard Taylor
Cambridge
http://www.rtaylor.co.uk

Cambridgeshire Constabulary

Dear Richard

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 0194/2014
We acknowledge receipt of your Freedom of Information (FOI) request which
was received by Cambridgeshire Constabulary on 05/03/2014

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.  You will receive a response within the statutory
timescale of twenty working days as defined by the Act. In some
circumstances, we may be unable to achieve this deadline. If this is the
case, you will be informed and given a revised time-scale at the earliest
opportunity.

If we require any further clarification regarding this request, you will
be notified.

We would advise you that the nature of certain requests may involve
payment of a fee.  If this is the case, you will be notified.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
telephone on 01480 456 111 asking for the Information Access Office or
email [Cambridgeshire Constabulary request email]

Regards

Julie Purse
Information Access Office
Cambridgeshire Constabulary

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To visit Cambridgeshire Constabulary's website please follow this link:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/index.asp

show quoted sections

Cambridgeshire Constabulary

1 Attachment

Dear Richard

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 0194/2014
In reply to your request for information under the Freedom of Information
Act 2000, received on 5 March 2014 in which you asked the following:

Please could you release the final report of the recently concluded review
into the role of PCSOs led by Chief Inspector James Sutherland.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (The Act) requires us to handle all
requests in a manner that is blind to the identity of the requestor.  Any
information released in response to a request is regarded as being
published, and therefore in the public domain without caveat.
We have completed all searches within Cambridgeshire Constabulary and
hereby enclose your response.

Your request for information has now been considered and I am not obliged
to supply the information you have requested due to exemptions provided by
the Act.

In respect of Section 1(1)(a) of the FOI Act I can confirm that
Cambridgeshire Constabulary do hold information about the recent review
into the Role of PCSOs as led by Ch Insp Sutherland.

Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Cambridgeshire
Constabulary, when refusing to provide such information (because the
information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:  
(a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c)
states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

The exemptions applicable to the information are:

Section 22 - Information Intended for Future Publication

Section 22 relates to information where the authority has made a decision
to publish the information but the date for publication has not been
reached.  I can confirm that the release strategy was set by Ch Insp
Sutherland at the time of the commissioning of the report.

This is a qualified class based exemption and as such I am required to
apply a public interest test.

Public Interest Test

Factors Favouring Early Disclosure

Information regarding the report was put into the public domain prior to
the report being finalised and so the earliest practical release of the
final report would assist in ensuring that any public debate was properly
informed.

Factors Favouring Non-Early Disclosure

The publication date is imminent and resources have already been allocated
for this purpose, including it's promotion in social media as well as
traditional outlets.  To bring forward the publication date would disrupt
the planned publication, increase costs and divert resources at a time of
high demand.

There is a duty placed upon us to ensure that those affected by it as well
as those who contributed towards it are properly advised and consulted
prior to its publication.  Publishing it earlier than intended would not
allow us to properly fullfil that duty.

Balance Test        

The report is due to be published by mid-April and the process for doing
this was agreed at the time of commissioning as being within one calendar
month of the final report being completed.  This has been, to the best of
my knowledge, complied with.  I fully accept the argument that the early
publication of the full report would be strongly in the public interest
and foster properly informed public date carries considerable weight and
were the publication date not imminent then would have been sufficient to
outweigh the counter arguments.   However, since the publication date has
been set as being by mid-April and the process is under way and there
would be costs involved in bringing the publication forward, I must on
this occasion uphold the arguments in favour of awaiting the publication
date.  I note also that interested parties affected by the report need to
be properly advised or consulted.

On this occasion, I uphold the s22 exemption.

In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for
this request.

If you are unhappy with this response, please see the attachment below,
which sets out your rights to appeal.

Regards

David
David Price
Information Access Office
Cambridgeshire Constabulary

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To visit Cambridgeshire Constabulary's website please follow this link:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/index.asp

show quoted sections

Dear Cambridgeshire Constabulary,

I would like to request an internal review into the decision to refuse my request for the final report of the recently concluded review into the role of PCSOs led by Chief Inspector James Sutherland.

Given an article purporting to be based on the outcome of the report has already been published* I suggest there is a strong public interest in making the report on which the article is based available to inform public debate.

Additionally I would like the internal review to consider publishing the "release strategy" referred to in the refusal notice; to provide an assurance that such a strategy genuinely exists. I would also like the review to consider if the "release strategy" has in fact been followed. If the report has, in whole or part, been released to selected individuals, or if formal or informal press releases refering to the review's findings, or report's conclusions, have been issued in a manner contravening the "release strategy" than I suggest it would be no longer appropriate to rely on that as a reason for withholding the information requested.

--

Richard Taylor
Cambridge
http://www.rtaylor.co.uk

* http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Bra...

Cambridgeshire Constabulary

Dear Richard

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 0194/2014        

We acknowledge receipt of your request for an Internal Review of our
response to you dated 1 April 2014

Your request asked for information about the Review into the Role of the
PCSO.
Your appeal will now be considered when the Appeal Panel convenes on
Wednesday 16th April .  You will be notified of the outcome of this appeal
in writing.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
telephone on 01480 456111 asking for the Information Access Office or
email [Cambridgeshire Constabulary request email]

Regards

David

David Price
Information Access Office
Cambridgeshire Constabulary

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To visit Cambridgeshire Constabulary's website please follow this link:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/index.asp

show quoted sections

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

The report has been published at:

https://www.cambs-police.co.uk/about/foi...

I have extracted what I think are the key points, and commented on them, at:

http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-...

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

The police have now removed the report from their website.

I have made it available on my website via:

http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-...

Cambridgeshire Constabulary

1 Attachment

Dear Richard

Please find attached the response letter in regard to your request for an
internal review.

(See attached file: FOI 0194-2014 Appeal Decision Letter.doc)

Many thanks
Donna Milton
Information Access Office
Cambridgeshire Constabulary
Tel 01487 772 092

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To visit Cambridgeshire Constabulary's website please follow this link:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/index.asp

show quoted sections

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

The document is not available via the link provided:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/about/plan...

Nor is it available via the link presumably intended without the trailing underscore:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/about/plan...

In fact the entire "Plans and reports" system appears out of date and disused; with the latest documents being from 2011.

I cannot see any relevant link in the publication scheme which covers reports arising from reviews. The core of the scheme is at:

https://www.cambs.police.uk/about/foi/cl...

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

The requested document has now been published and made available via the link given in the response.

It is available at:

http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/about/foi/...

There are 22 fewer pages in the document published than the version I have published on my website at:

http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/pdf/PCSO_Review...

No explanation is given for much of the missing material; only one section of omitted material is marked "redacted"

I've commented on differences between the documents at:

http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-...