The UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals.

Disclosure log - March 2011

Disclosure log

Related items


Request Ref: IRQ0372603
Date of Response: 30/03/2011
Request:
you have been giving advice to various parties engaged in the publication of the recent police 'crime maps'.
your press release of 1 february refers 
http://www.ico.gov.uk/~/media/documents/pressreleases/2011/Crimemapping_statement_20110201.ashx
the approximation of crime locations and aggregation of reported crimes has caused public disquiet.
i request a copy of your final advice. however, publication of your advice itself is not sufficient (i notice that your press release
does not refer to a published edocument).

there is a strong public interest in understanding how your office arrived at the advice to which your press notice refers and the nature of your dialogue with the principal actors as they formed their opinions. in particular how your office balanced the public interest factors with privacy issues.

i request all correspondence, records, emails, texts documents, presentations, meeting notes etc and any other information you hold that dicusses issues around crime mapping from May 2010 to date. you note in your press release that advice needs to be kept under review and such information will help the public help you in that
regard.

this should include your offices internal dialogue, dialogue with the home office, other bits of government and their representatives, other police bodies such as ACPO, individual forces, lobby groups such as vicitims support organisations, citizens and public office holders.
if you hold correspondence with bodies that are not covered by FOI my understanding is that you are obliged to release that, including their side of the correspondence such as an email chain.

I also request a simple list of organisations and members of the public you consulted on the broad matter of crime mapping during the period above in forming your advice.

If you cannot meet this request without exceeding cost limits then please give me what information you can within the limit and contact me to discuss what might be the most useful response.
Our response


Request Ref: IRQ0378733
Date of Response: 24/03/2011
Request:
I understand that the Information Commissioner has the power, under section 51 (7) of the Data Protection Act 1998, to assess data controllers, with their consent, in order to advise on good practice and to check that appropriate procedures are being followed. I am interested in how this power has been exercised over the last twelve months. Specifically, I would like to know how many organisations have been invited to consent to an audit in each of the last twelve months. Please could this information be broken down by sector? eg. energy and utilities, banking, retail, telecommunications, construction, public sector etc.

In addition I would like to know how many organisations have agreed to this audit being undertaken. Could this numbers please be provided in the same way, by sector and for each of the last twelve months.
Our response


Request Ref: IRQ0378009
Date of Response: 22/03/11
Request:
I am writing to request details relating to the ICO's policy on disclosure of staff salary details, with particular reference to a comment by Christopher Graham on the ICO staff blog on 23 August 2010, where he wrote:

"It's inevitable that every now and then someone will test us out by making an information request about us to see if our response is consistent with what we demand of others. This has happened most recently with the request for the names and salary details, within £5,000 bands, of all ICO staff. Although our proposed response is consistent with our existing policy the disclosure of personal details, albeit work-related is clearly uncomfortable for some. Our colleagues in Internal Compliance have received a number of objections to the proposed disclosure from individual members of staff."

I would like to request

  • copies of any staff emails seeking or making representations from/to Internal Compliance on the proposed disclosure, including any emails sent between June and July making representations about existing policy, with redactions of the identity of the sender only where necessary and in the public
  • details of the 'existing policy' referred to (i.e. before August 2010)

Our response
Attachment


Request Ref: IRQ0374290
Date of Response: 09/03/2011
Request:
Please can you provide me with the full diary of the Information Commisioner for the calendar year of 2010 as held by his diary secretary. Please release the diary in full as it appears on 5 day view (Mon - Fri) in Outlook.
Our response
Attachment

Request Ref: IRQ0374832
Date of Response: 08/03/11
Request:
During your recent monitoring of FOI response rates how many councils were at 100%?

How many were at +95-99% and how many at +90-94%?

What percentage of the overall total councils checked were these numbers?
Our response


Request Ref: IRQ0371098
Date of Response: 03/03/2011
Request:
This is an enquiry under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
 
Please advise if the Secretary of State has granted any Exemption Extension Orders under DPA S38?
 
If any such Orders have ever been granted, please advise under which official publication scheme they are published?  Or otherwise how copies may be obtained?
Our response


Request Ref: IRQ0372739
Date of Response: 02/03/2011
Request:
Since the introduction of both the Freedom Of Information Act and the Data Protection Act, could you provide a total number for instances of which you are aware where an English Local Authority or Council has attempted (by making the matter conditional as part of a compromise agreement) to inhibit or remove the statutory rights of the signatory party (employee) and thereby to compel them into forgoing / reducing / removing their ability to make FOI and/or DPA requests in the future?

In connection with this area, please provide information which explains / confirms / refutes whether such an approach by a Local Authority would in fact remove the statutory rights of the signatory party (employee)
Our response

Go back to the disclosure log