Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Recommendation 8

Ninth Report - The Cabinet Office Freedom of Information Clearing House Published 29 Apr 2022 Paragraph 46
Recommendation (the committee's words)
The Cabinet Office should review these practices and their own compliance with the Freedom of Information Act to model best practice. This should include, in particular, the adoption, where possible, of applicant-blind processing of requests; clear guidance on the very limited circumstances under which it may be appropriate for Ministers and Special Advisers to become involved in responding to Freedom of Information requests; and the establishment of appropriate timetables for the completion of internal reviews. Where it finds evidence that practices in Government departments are falling short of best practice, it should implement robust procedures to prevent their reoccurrence.

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Ninth Report - The Cabinet Office Freedom of Information Clearing House (HC 505), paragraph 46, 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".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error