FOI Request - Care Managers - Review

Request 101000400882

I should be grateful if you would undertake a review of the above referenced decision.

Although your notice does not include this advice, I understand that in accordance with section 20 of the Act I am required to specify the matter(s) which gives rise to my dissatisfaction.  I do so below:

The information request was as follows:

"Can I have the name and contact details including email for the manager directly responsible for the Children's Leaving Care Service.

Can I also have the same details for the post responsible for the service at third tier if different."

My reasons for dissatisfaction are:

The information which is required to be given in accordance with Section 1 of the Act has not been communicated in accordance with section 11

The notice given under section 16 of the Act is not in accordance with the law.

The notice has not specified which exemption is relied on in withholding the information.

The notice has not given a reason why the exemption applies merely a statement of fact as to the authorities practice.

The authorities stated practice unreasonably constrains its discretion.

There is no evidence that the public authority has assessed whether it or the data subjects in question have already placed the personal data requested in the public domain.

Given the important public functions exercised by the post holders the balancing exercise required under condition 6 of the first schedule to the Data Protection Act 1998 and the requirements as to fairness mean that ordinarily the public interest favours disclosure of the requested information, except where the public authority has afforded the individual in question the opportunity to object to disclosure and is satisfied that the reason given means that disclosure would be unwarranted in the particular case.  There is no evidence in the decision notice that the authority has done so.

Not all supposedly non-exempt contact details have been disclosed in response to the request.

The statement about which post is third tier does not appear to be in accordance with the facts.

Response 08-01-2016

Following your request for a review of our response to the FOI 101000398296, this was held at the council offices on January 6th 2016. In attendance were the council’s Records and Heritage Manager, Senior Solicitor and Information Co-ordinator.

The reason for the original decision was discussed, namely that our current practice is to withhold employee names for data protection purposes and that job titles may change over time.

Upon investigation, it was found that the information you requested is already publicly available and is therefore exempt under Section 25 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. For ease of reference you can find this information here.