FOIMan brings you the second in his series of articles for PDP’s Freedom of Information Journal.
A couple of weeks ago I wrote here about the series of articles I’ve been writing for PDP’s Freedom of Information Journal. The first article was on deadlines, and this week I’m making available my piece called Game, Dataset and Match, which, as the more perceptive amongst you will have gathered, is about the new dataset requirements that came in on 1 September. You should note that this article was published much earlier in the year before the Information Commissioner and Ministry of Justice had published their guidance/finalised Code of Practice, so is a little out of date already. (The general trend this year has been that if I’ve prepared a talk or an article, a major development supercedes it just before publication or presentation. All I need now is to find a way to exploit this extraordinary gift.)
However…in September I was also asked to write on this subject for Privacy Laws & Business, another information rights publication, and as a special bonus, I have their permission to reproduce that piece here as well. Bang(ish) up to date. So there you go, two articles on datasets and FOI for the price of one right here at foiman.com.
Next week I’ll be bringing you a piece on handling vexatious requests. And there may be one or two other posts in the next week or so (including another guest post from academic researcher Joe Reddington), so keep your eyes peeled.
Thanks, as ever, Paul.
One feature that I was thinking about, and which I am sure that you could elucidate clearly in your vexatiousness post, is how to balance the PI in release against the onerousness. So, where the PI is high, but the request would take 200 hrs to undertake activities that cannot be done under s12 (consultations, redactions, etc), can you still use 14?
This is late in the day, but some words on this would help (well, it would help me – pls God, I hope that I am not the only person in the world that is unclear on this).