Saturday, 26 June 2010

Clarification requested from the Information Commissioners Office

26 June 2010-06-26

Case Reference Number FS50268578
Public Authority Department for Education (DE)

Dear Claire Walsh

I am disappointed to learn that the issue of delayed responses to FOI requests has been dealt with and cannot be revisited.  Is there an appeals process?  Should the people affected by the DCSF’s failure to comply with the time limits of the FOI act have been informed of the process and findings of the investigation in detail?. The fact that the DE as it is now is more compliant does not negate the fact that the delays may have been a deliberate device to prevent myself and others obtaining the information we needed to defend ourselves and to prevent us involving the Information Commissioners Office in a timely manner so that something could have been done at a time when it would have been effective.  The fact that the department is no longer tarrying so long before responding would support the suggestion that the delays were deliberate as the Badman review is no longer a current issue.

I am puzzled by your use of the term DE in the email below, the department was the DCSF at the time and it was the DCSF not the DE that applied sections, 41, 40 and 38. 

The outstanding questions are correct except that point three below is just a repetition of the quote from the media, my question is, is the information contained in the two spreadsheets the complete and only source of the claims made in this quote?

I also have  a query about the second questionnaire released by the DE, I cannot match it to either the second in depth questionnaire to 25 local authorities or the September call for supplemental data to support the Report in front of the Select Committee.  I would very much appreciate clarification as to this.

Yours sincerely

Maire Stafford

1 comment:

Maire said...

Looking like this is the answers to this questionnaire which is the second in depth questionnaire.

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Feed