Tag Archive for FOI Officers

Open Data Institute: FOI Talk

FOIMan gave last Friday’s ODI Friday lecture at the Open Data Institute in London.

Paul Gibbons speaking at the ODI

Paul Gibbons speaking at the Open Data Institute © Open Data Institute 2019

I gave a talk on Friday 27th September as part of the Open Data Institute’s programme of ODI Friday lectures. Slightly early for International Right to Know Day (which it was on Saturday), I spoke about the importance of FOI Officers to successful implementation and improvement of FOI and transparency initiatives. You can watch my presentation on YouTube on the Open Data Institute’s channel.

I refer in the talk to my book. If you want to know more about The Freedom of Information Officer’s Handbook, I have set up a new page where you can access details of the book including a free chapter (and a discount on the cover price of the book), the video above and more.

There are also lots of other free resources under the Resources tab above.

How to be an FOI Officer

FOIMan brings you his latest article for PDP – and news of a new training course for FOI Officers.

When I first worked as an FOI Officer back in 2003, setting up procedures and systems in the Greater London Authority, the biggest problem was that nobody  (in the UK at least) had done this before. There was some guidance available but broadly speaking every organisation had to make up its approach to FOI from scratch. Things have improved a bit since then, but a lot of FOI Officers are still making it up as they go along to a great extent.

One of the ways that can improve is through academic research. This year we’ve been blessed with not one, but two studies of FOI practices. One is focussed on London’s local authorities, and the other on councils throughout the UK. In my latest piece for the Freedom of Information Journal, I’ve summarised the findings of these important pieces of research.

Once again, I’ll be answering your questions about FOI in a future issue of the Freedom of Information Journal, so do drop me a line if there’s a subject you’d like me to address.

I’m also pleased to announce that my working relationship with PDP is expanding. Earlier this year I was honoured to accept an invitation to head up the exam board for PDP’s Freedom of Information Practitioner Certificate. And even more exciting than that…this Autumn we will be launching a new one-day course for FOI Officers, based on my recently published The Freedom of Information Officer’s Handbook. The first dates for ‘The Role of The FOI Officer’ have been announced, beginning in London on 31 October, with subsequent courses running in Manchester, Glasgow and Belfast over the next year. If you’d like to discuss the best ways to manage and improve FOI performance, or want to more readily decipher decision notices, do please consider booking to join me on one of the days. Details of the course can be found on PDP’s website.

Don’t forget as well the other events I’ll be speaking at this Autumn, most of which are still taking bookings. I hope to see you there!

Don’t Google your requesters

FOIMan explains that searching for FOI requesters is not a great idea – and is ethically (and legally) dubious.

This blog originally aimed to give the practitioner’s view of FOI. Far too often, the important role of FOI officers and public officials in making FOI work has been ignored. So an increasing interest in how FOI really works behind the scenes is to be celebrated.

We’ve seen it in two recent reports on FOI in local authorities. The first from MySociety looked at FOI in local government across the UK. The second, from the Campaign for FOI, focussed on how London boroughs managed their FOI obligations. Interestingly, the findings of the two reports on practices in local councils are broadly in line with my own research which you can read about in the free chapter from The Freedom of Information Officer’s Handbook that I wrote about in my last post.

The Campaign for FOI’s research commented on the London Borough of Lambeth’s practices, and I was reminded of this when my attention was drawn last week to a post by a local blogger who had obtained Lambeth’s internal staff guidance for handling FOI requests. The News from Crystal Palace blog published the guidance pretty much in full, highlighting a number of practices which they felt were of concern.

Having read through it, much of the guidance is pretty standard stuff, and in fact I would go as far as to suggest that there is some very good practice in Lambeth. For example, strict timelines and service standards are a good way to ensure that requests are answered within statutory deadlines.

One particular section is of concern, however. Staff allocated a request are told:

‘You may want to consider all or some of the following when you are assessing a request:

  • Google the requester to understand who is making the request, why and assess the likely impact to the council (e.g. political, media, legal, commercial, personal data).
  • Review previous requests from the requester in iCasework.’

No. I can, at a pinch, understand the human instinct of curiosity that might lead an uninformed member of staff to use a search engine to find out about a requester. But FOI officers should be discouraging this practice, and certainly not making it official policy.

I know all the excuses. Often it is linked to a policy whereby an authority’s Press Office is informed when a journalist makes a request. In principle I don’t have a problem with that, as long as public authorities are open about the fact that they do it. The problem is that some journalists, perhaps suspicious that they will be treated differently, don’t identify themselves as such. The Act doesn’t require them to do so. The argument goes that therefore every requester has to be googled in order to identify the very small percentage of requesters that are unidentified journalists.

I’m going to suggest that this is flawed logic. Firstly, since most public authorities, and certainly councils, are suffering the effects of cuts to their budgets, why are they encouraging staff to waste precious staff time on the off-chance that someone might be a journalist? Even if they are, it shouldn’t make any difference to the outcome of the request, so surely this is a complete waste of time?

Secondly, how does the council know that someone who isn’t a journalist in the formal sense won’t blog or Tweet about disclosed information? Or pass it to a journalist for that matter? Given this, the fact that one or two journalists might not be picked up doesn’t seem that important.

Thirdly, whilst I recognise that Press Officers have a job to do, I don’t see why they necessarily need to know who is making a request. The sensitivity of a request surely ought to be judged on the subject matter, irrespective of who has made it. Lambeth apparently circulate a list of requests to their Press Office and the Leader’s Office. If this just describes the subject matter of the request this should normally be enough for them to identify where they might need to be prepared for controversy (which really should be the limit of their involvement following an FOI request).

There will be a director of public relations somewhere barking “well, why shouldn’t we?”, so here are a few points in answer to that question.

  • what’s your lawful basis? An individual’s FOI request, their identity, biographical information about them is personal data. You need a lawful basis to justify the handling of personal data – including searching for information about someone online. I presume you’ve completed a legitimate interest assessment and successfully justified how your need to know whether or not someone is a journalist outweighs the rights and freedoms of requesters? Even if you decide that you do have such a basis, are you otherwise complying with the requirements of the GDPR? Are you telling requesters that if they make a request it will result in the council looking them up online?
  • they can find out that you’re doing it. If the requester has a website, the most commonly used analytics tools will provide enough information to them so that they will spot unusual spikes in interest from your general location just after they made a request to you. There’s an example of this happening described in my book if you don’t believe me.
  • it’s creepy. Most comment on Twitter in response to revelations about Lambeth’s practice was to the effect that Lambeth were ‘spying’ on their residents. If a public authority is so concerned about its reputation that it employs Press Officers, shouldn’t it be just a little uncomfortable about gaining a public image associated with the fiction of George Orwell?

FOI is a right. Full stop. If people choose to exercise it, that is their business. If a public authority has good reason to believe that someone is misusing this right – perhaps harassing a member of staff, for instance – there are mechanisms for dealing with that. It is not usually necessary for a public authority to snoop on people to identify this kind of misuse.

Don’t google requesters. There’s usually no good reason, and it has the potential to do a lot of harm.

 

Ten things practitioners hate…

FOIMan writes about the ten things FOI requesters do which most annoy practitioners.

freedom-of-information-graphic-smallBack in March, the PDP Freedom of Information Journal published a piece by me listing the ten things that requesters hate most about the way their requests are handled. I provided access to a copy of the article here, and promised to bring you a further piece looking at this from the opposite perspective.

So here’s my latest piece for the Journal on Ten Things FOI Practitioners Hate Most. How do FOI requesters cause frustration for FOI Officers? Feel free to comment if you agree or disagree with these!

The ten things FOI requesters hate most

FOIMan writes for PDP’s Freedom of Information Journal on the “ten things FOI requesters hate most” about the way public authorities handle their requests.

freedom-of-information-graphic-smallThose of you working for public authorities – FOI Officers and others – work hard, I’m sure, to get FOI responses out as soon as possible. And no doubt you do your best to keep the customers satisfied. But we can always do more, and a bit of constructive feedback can help us to improve.

But how do you get that feedback? Sometimes requesters ask for an internal review, but often they don’t. So we have to find other ways to get inside the minds of those who want to know more about our organisations. How? Well, what do most of us do these days when we’re annoyed with somebody? We Tweet about it, of course!

I’ve saved you some time by trawling Twitter, WhatDoTheyKnow and other sources to identify the behaviours that cause our requesters the most annoyance. It’s completely unscientific, but you can read what I came up with in my latest piece for PDP’s Freedom of Information Journal. If you’re a subscriber, your copy of the journal should be landing on your doormat (or in your inbox) right about now.