Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Conclusion 3
Ninth Report - The Cabinet Office Freedom of Information Clearing House
Published 29 Apr 2022
Paragraph 28
Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee The Cabinet Office Freedom of Information Clearing House All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
It is disappointing that the Cabinet Office rejected the Information Commissioner’s Office’s offer to undertake a Freedom of Information Audit, and we are concerned both by this refusal itself and by the precedent this may set across Government. The Cabinet Office’s decision was misjudged given the Information Commissioner’s Office’s Freedom of Information expertise and, importantly, the Commissioner’s independence. The Information Commissioner’s Office, as the official statutory regulator for Freedom of Information and Data Protection, is better placed than any other organisation to undertake a review of this kind. The basis for this rejection therefore remains unclear, and we are unconvinced by the explanations from the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office’s internal review, launched only after the Committee initiated this inquiry, is no substitute for the independent assurance that the Information Commissioner’s Office would be able to provide.
From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Ninth Report - The Cabinet Office Freedom of Information Clearing House (HC 505), paragraph 28, 29 April 2022
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 7 July 2022.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government largely does not adopt the Committee's recommendations, and in place of an external ICO audit it is relying on an internal review led by Sue Langley OBE.
- On transparency, the government "notes" the Committee's concerns but its "present view" is that quarterly statistics on referrals would be "a disproportionate use of resources for a de minimis function".
- On the ICO audit, it considers an internal review "a proportionate response"; the Langley review will look at whether further information should be published, and the government will "update Parliament and the Committee in due course".
- On practice, it states that all FOI requests are handled "on an applicant blind basis" and that it is "legitimate" for Special Advisers to assist on requests. It says it would be "wrong" for the Cabinet Office to intervene in another department's procedures.
- On the Advanced Research and Invention Agency, it says the exemption was agreed by both Houses and it "has no plans to revisit this decision". Work to revise guidance on non-corporate communication channels "has now resumed".