Annemarie O’Donnell LLB Executive Director Corporate Services Glasgow City Council City Chambers George Square Glasgow G2 1DU Phone 0141 287 4522 Fax No 0141 287 3627 Our ref: RQST4228881 Your ref: 14 March 2013 Sent by email to [email protected] Dear Mr Hughes REQUEST FOR REVIEW UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (SCOTLAND) ACT 2002 (“THE ACT”) Thank you for your email of 26 February 2013 in which you have requested a formal review of the way in which Glasgow City Council (the “Council”) dealt with your request for information received by the Council on 11 January You have requested a review on the basis that you are dissatisfied with the response that the Council sent to you on 26 February 2013. YOUR REQUEST You requested the following information: “Can you confirm that Gordon Matheson accompanied Steven Purcell on council business to London during February 2010? Can you confirm that they stayed at the Kensington Holiday Inn and that all costs were met from the public purse? Can you confirm that Gordon Matheson was required to escort Steven Purcell back to Glasgow earlier than scheduled as a result of what Mr. Matheson referred to as "a total breakdown" experienced by Mr.Purcell? Can you confirm that this issue was the subject of discussion and correspondence involving several senior officials of the council? Can you make available all correspondence relating to this matter, particularly correspondence from Gordon Matheson in respect of the "bizarre" behaviour of Steven Purcell that has been reported to have been observed while in London?” C:\DOCUME~1\aysheab\LOCALS~1\Temp\4428881 REVIEW LETTER2.doc THE DECISION On 26 February 2013 a response was sent to you from Ayshea Brown Corporate services Glasgow City Council, setting out the responses to the issues raised in your request for information. THE REVIEW On 26 February 2013 you wrote to the Council expressing your dissatisfaction with the way in which the Council dealt with your request for information. I understand from your review request that, in summary, the reasons for your dissatisfaction are as follows: 1. The Council did not release information to you which they consider exempt under the freedom of Information ( Scotland ) Act 2002 2. You believe the Council’s decision to withhold information to you on the grounds of data protection was erroneous 3. You were dissatisfied with the Council’s explanation of its decision to withhold the complainant’s details. THE REVIEW DECISION I have now reviewed Ms Brown’s decision. In relation to your request for review, I have addressed below, using the same numbering as in the paragraph above, what I understand to be the key points of your request for review: 1. I consider this aspect of the request to be outwith the scope of Freedom of Information. The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2004 (“the Act”) entitles a person to request recorded information held by a Scottish local authority at the time the request is made (s.1 of the Act). The entitlement does not extend to a right to request that the public authority answers additional questions or provide analysis or opinion on any matter arising from the request, unless such opinion existed in a recorded format at the time the request was made. 2. With regard to the Council’s decision not to release further details of the communications which you request access to. I take the view that the relevant exemptions are contained in the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 Exemptions relied upon and referred to above are:- Section 30 Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs Section 30 (b) disclosure of the information would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially- (i) the free and frank provision of advice; or (ii) the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation; or Section 30 (c) disclosure of the information would otherwise prejudice substantially, or be likely to prejudice substantially, the effective conduct of public affairs. C:\DOCUME~1\aysheab\LOCALS~1\Temp\4428881 REVIEW LETTER2.doc The information you have requested is, in my opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in section 30 of the Act as set out above, thus in my opinion disclosure of the exemption would, or would be likely to inhibit or prejudice substantially the free and frank provision of advice of officers of the Council. The advice and discussions between officers (and on this occasion, elected members) would be likely to be inhibited if information of this type were to be released, to the substantial prejudice of the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation. While I believe the exemption contained in section 30 applies in this case, I would still be obliged to release the information in response to your request unless the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information. Glasgow City Council acknowledges the significant public interest in openness and transparency and therefore recognises that any request under section 1 of the Act is potentially in the public interest. I acknowledge the significant public interest in the subject matter of your request. However, I also believe there is a significant public interest in authorities such as the Council being able to assess critically all factors involved in these types of decisions, and to reach the best possible decision. On occasions this can only be done on the basis of candid advice and a free exchange of views, of a sort which cannot take place if all information is disclosed. The public interest in openness and transparency is satisfied by the release of all relevant information concerning the decisions ultimately reached and the reasons for these, without the need to disclose all the debate which surrounded these decisions. The Council has already released significant amounts of information regarding this matter (limited, it has to be said, by the relatively small amount of information actually held) I find the information the Council already released is sufficient to meet that significant public interest. In the circumstances of these messages the specific public interest in safeguarding the very small amount of information withheld clearly outweighs the general public interest in openness and transparency. Section 38 Personal Information The information which you have requested is, in my opinion, exempt from a request under section 1 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 because of the exemption contained in section 38 (1)(b) of the Act. In other words, in my opinion disclosure would involve disclosing personal data as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998, and that such disclosure would breach the Data Protection Principles contained in Schedule 1 Part 1 of that Act. I have sought to identify relevant conditions within the Data Protection Act 1998 which would justify the release of this personal data, but have concluded that none of these principles would be satisfied if the Council were to disclose the data in question. 3. Information is exempt from release if it constitutes personal data of a third party and release of the information would breach any of the data protection principles set out in schedule 1 to the Data Protection Act 1998. In this instance, I take the view that release of the information would breach the first data protection principle i.e. that personal data must “be processed fairly and lawfully”. C:\DOCUME~1\aysheab\LOCALS~1\Temp\4428881 REVIEW LETTER2.doc RIGHT OF APPEAL I hope that you are satisfied with this response. However, if you are not you have the right to make an application within 6 months of receipt of this letter for a decision by the Scottish Information Commissioner, Kinburn Castle, Doubledykes Road, St Andrews, KY16 9DS. Yours sincerely ANNEMARIE O’DONNELL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR C:\DOCUME~1\aysheab\LOCALS~1\Temp\4428881 REVIEW LETTER2.doc .