Consultation on Extension of Coverage of Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 106: Line 106:
(ii) a number of pubic authorities and voluntary groups work together to establish a trust which subsequently receives the vast majority of its funding from one or more public authorities.
(ii) a number of pubic authorities and voluntary groups work together to establish a trust which subsequently receives the vast majority of its funding from one or more public authorities.


We see no reason to exclude bodies/trust which were not established by local authorities but which presently receive the majority of their income from public funds.
We see no reason to exclude bodies/trust which were not established by local authorities but which presently receive the majority of their income from public funds. Similarly, restricting the functions for which these bodies are subject to the Act to


==E: Glasgow Housing Association==
==E: Glasgow Housing Association==

Revision as of 09:04, 1 November 2010

A: Contractors who run privately managed prisons and provide prisoner escort services

invitation to comment on A

"We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in our analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to private prisons and prison escort services that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Are there any other comments you wish to make, including any on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"

draft response to A

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include contractors who run privately managed prisons and provide prisoner escort services. We agree with the arguments in support of adding them, and with the conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.

B: Contractors who build and/or maintain schools

invitation to comment on B

"We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in our analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to contractors that build and maintain schools that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Do you believe different thresholds for coverage (such as a different contract value and/or duration) should be set?
  • Are there any other comments you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"

draft response to B

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include contractors who build and/or maintain schools. We agree with the arguments in support of adding them, and with the conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.

We believe that a lower threshold for coverage should apply, as £20 million / 10 years will exclude a significant number of contractors, some of which could be working on more than one project at a time that would otherwise bring them in scope. We would propose that a cumulative project amount of £8 million, with projects lasting 3 years and over be more appropriate.

C: Contractors who build and maintain hospitals

invitation to comment on C

We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in our analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to contracts who build and maintain hospitals that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Do you believe different thresholds for coverage (such as different contract value and/or duration) should be set?
  • Are there any other comments you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?

draft response to C

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include contractors who build and/or maintain hospitals. We agree with the arguments in support of adding them, and with the conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.

We believe that a lower threshold for coverage should apply, as £20 million / 10 years will exclude a significant number of contractors, some of which could be working on more than one project at a time that would otherwise bring them in scope. We would propose that a cumulative project amount of £8 million, with projects lasting 3 years and over be more appropriate.

D: Leisure, sport and cultural trusts and bodies established by local authorities

invitation to comment on D

"We invite comments on any of the points made abovein this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Do you agree with the proposed criteria for identifying appropriate trusts? If not, what alternative criteria would you consider appropriate?
  • Do you consider setting a minimum level of annual public funding threshold practicable and reasonable – given that funding is subject to fluctuations?
  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in this analysis? In particular, are there any additional bodies which would meet the proposed definition in Annex A?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to local authority trusts that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Are there other points you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"


draft response to D

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include leisure, sport and cultural organisations established by local authorities. We agree with the arguments in support of adding them, and with the conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.

We believe there is a potential loophole in the the draft order. The words "Bodies established or created by a local authority" could exclude situations where:

(i) a local authority identified an existing trust or charity with relatively little income and subsequently directs substantial funding through it.

(ii) a number of pubic authorities and voluntary groups work together to establish a trust which subsequently receives the vast majority of its funding from one or more public authorities.

We see no reason to exclude bodies/trust which were not established by local authorities but which presently receive the majority of their income from public funds. Similarly, restricting the functions for which these bodies are subject to the Act to

E: Glasgow Housing Association

invitation to comment on E

"We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in this analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to GHA that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Are there other points you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"

draft response to E

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include Glasgow Housing Association. We note that Glasgow Housing Association already operates within the spirit of the Act.

In Weaver v. London and Quadrant Housing Trust [2008] the Court found that social rented housing sector is "permeated by state control and influence with a view to meeting the Government's aims for affordable housing, and in which RSLs work side by side with, and can in a very real sense be said to take the place of, local authorities". It is therefore reasonable that the Freedom of Information Act (Scotland) 2002 should apply to all housing associations just as it applies to local authorities.

F: The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (‘ACPOS’)

invitation to comment on F

"We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in our analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to ACPOS that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Are there any other points that you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"

draft response to F

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland. We note that ACPOS already operates within the spirit of the the Act. This would also bring ACPOS in line with the UK Government bringing ACPO under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. We agree with the arguments in support of adding ACPOS, and with the conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.

G: Contractors who build, manage and maintain trunk roads under private finance contracts

invitation to comment on G

"We invite comments on any of the points made in this section, and also on the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B which discusses the possible impact on extending coverage to the bodies concerned.

In particular we invite you to consider the following:

  • Are there any factual inaccuracies in our analysis?
  • Is there a case either for or against extending coverage to contractors who build, manage and maintain trunk roads under private finance contracts that you wish to make?
  • Are you able to provide any evidence to support your arguments?
  • Are there any other points you wish to make, particularly on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment at Annex B?"

draft response to G

We welcome the proposal to extend the coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 to include road construction and maintenance contractors.

The effect of extending the coverage of the Act to these bodies would also ensure they are covered by the access to information provisions of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 and INSPIRE (Scotland) Regulations 2009. These bodies have a major impact on the environment, and will be responsible for looking after large amounts of public land, often in sensitive rural areas. Allowing public access to the environmental information and geo-spatial datasets that they hold will ensure transparency and allow the public to hold them to account.

The consultation paper states that:

"Whilst operations such as construction and facilities management are usually sub-contracted, the sub-contractors will be holding information on behalf of the main contractor and so the right to request information will extend beyond the information held immediately by the principal contractor."

We are concerned that there may be a risk of "Chinese Walls" or other disclosure avoidance tactics being implemented to protect information being released by subcontractors, or SPV parent shareholders and/or subsidiary companies in order to prevent "information held on behalf of" coming into play.

The Draft Section 5 Order states:

"The contract has a value of not less than £90 million and a duration of not less than 30 years."

We believe that this threshold is set too high, for example it will exclude a £250m / 25 year contract. In addition, those bodies who have multiple road contracts with the Scottish Government that only cumulatively meet the threshold will be excluded. We would propose that a cumulative contract amount of £50m be used as the threshold, with a minimum contract duration of 10 years.

Apart from points raised above, we agree with the major arguments in support of adding them to the Act, and with the other conclusions of your analysis, including the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment.