It seems the absolute majority of the list has nothing to say in reply to my question and I do take into account such massive silence (I am talking about the reply I had to the question asked about a procurement exercise, see previous message and https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/brunella_longo)
To me, such massive silence says a lot in terms of disconcert and disappointment - and perhaps also a bit of scepticism about the effectiveness of FOI legislation in assuring more transparency and accountability within public processes.
As far as the "stupidity" argument is concerned thanks for the thoughts expressed about it. I have some doubt though that it applies in that: there is no reason to delete information that arises from stupidity or from unintentional mistakes. On the contrary, the more transparency we assure about mistakes made in public processes for whatever reason - and very often for human stupidity or distruction - the less likelihood that they occur again. I have succeeded in making the Insolvency Service re-gazetting a bankruptcy notice in which they had unadvertedly mistaken the name of the Court. Perhaps because this was not the only mistake made in my bizarre bankruptcy case (now discharged, in the next future very likely to be annulled) I do believe they have done the right thing and I guess they will be very careful in the future in sending out for publication documents made copying templates or using email communications without controls.
Having said that, it is only the transparency about the whole public process, including mistakes, that makes possible to understand if there was any failure of governance or any individual or group misbehaviour. If we delete the data such possibility disappears.
A reply I have received in private from a person working for a legal firm adds these words:
"Hi. I am intrigued. There may be circumstances where for example a request is received in one part of an organisation and on the same day, in another part of the same organisation, requested information is disposed of quite legitimately in line with established business processes/retention schedules. Do they publish these anywhere? Not good, but can happen. It does seem to me though that the authority in question have failed in their duty to advise and assist as the response is pretty sparse. You may know the reason-but would the wider world (which is the real test)?"
That's all for now. I may comment further through my icm2re web column. But if you have any further thought please let me know.
Regards
Brunella Longo
Information Management Adviser
Open Data Assurance
http://www.brunellalongo.co.uk
:::
Telephone +44(0)7549921488
email: [log in to unmask]
:::
PO BOX 53880
London SE27 7BU
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
