Category: Freedom of Information

Happy New Year. Isn’t it horrid to be back at work? Normally the end of year holiday is very quiet – not so this year, so I have taken the opportunity to report on three issues that could have been easily missed since my last blog. The commentary deals with Smart Meters, Violent Warning Markers and Undertakings. Full references at end as usual. Smart Metering With the UK’s Government blessing, most public utilities are moving to “smart metering”.  For instance,

Following an FOI request instigated by yours truly, it has emerged that GCHQ are keeping tabs on FOI requestors. Even those requestors who have asked public authorities for a copy of GCHQ’s widely distributed, declassified, IT security documentation. The circumstances of my request illustrates why the FOIA exemption (Section 23) pertaining “national security” is ridiculously wide, and raises questions as to what “national security” now means. The information that was the object of my desires is sexily entitled: “HMG IA

After imbibing some Bavarian Lager and a number of Decision Notices (including some Scottish ones), I have come to the conclusion that FOI requests of the kind “Please provide, in electronic form, the email addresses of all members of staff” can be resisted until a public authority is certain that the balance of interest lies with disclosure. This blog explains why I think this is the case, so please argue with me if you think I am wrong. I started

Sadly, there is more data protection case-law arising from the conflict over requests for personal data made under freedom of information (FOI) legislation, than there is when there is a data protection conflict. This state of affairs is the result of the fact the Commissioner has to publish a Decision Notice in relation to a disputed FOI request, whereas there is no similar Notice provision associated with an assessment as to whether or not a data controller is complying with, for

Whilst the UK press is focusing on the “love-in” between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives now in coalition government, it might be useful to put on record what the parties have agreed in their plan to “implement a full programme of measures to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties under the Labour Government and roll back state intrusion”. Equally important is to recognise what “did not make the cut” with respect to that agreement. Why is this important?

There are three consequences arising from the Prime Minister’s speech today. The first is that more information is to be made public and the publication scheme might be the vehicle for this enhancement; the second is that the reuse of public information is to be expanded considerably and reuse is likely to be free (i.e. no licence fee); the third relates to the ID Card project (which might be in trouble). In relation to more access to information, the PM