Dear Sir or Madam,

Following the Prime Minister's comments regarding the amount of
food wasted by British households, could you please tell me how
much unused food, in terms of weight, was thrown out by Number 10
in the last 6 months?

Yours faithfully,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your request for information. In order for us to process
your request could you please provide us with your name and contact
details for correspondence.

Yours Sincerely,

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have already provided you with my name and contact details in my
original request.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your further email. Unfortunately, the version of your
original request contained no name or contact details. I have reproduced
the version we have for your information:

Dear Sir or Madam,

Following the Prime Minister's comments regarding the amount of
food wasted by British households, could you please tell me how
much unused food, in terms of weight, was thrown out by Number 10
in the last 6 months?

Yours faithfully,

FOIRequester

Under the Freedom of Information Act, we require a name and contact
details from the requester in order to process any request, and as such
I would be grateful for those details so we can begin to process this.

Yours Sincerely,

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

I refer you to S8(2) of the FOIA which clearly states that a
"...request is to be treated as made in writing where the text of
the request— (a) is transmitted by electronic means, (b) is
received in legible form, and (c) is capable of being used for
subsequent reference.

The email address you have been provided with is a valid address
and it is through that address that I wish to communicate. With
regards to my name, I have provided with the name that I use for
FOI requests and I would like to be addressed as such.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your further email. I refer you to Section 8(1) of the
Freedom of Information Act:

a "request for information" is a reference to such a request which -
(a) is in writing,
(b) states the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence,

Whilst your request has been received in writing and we have a suitable
contact address for you, you have not provided your name, and as such we
will not process your request until this information is received.

Yours Sincerely,

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have made my request under a name I regularly use for FOI
requests and cannot understand why you refuse to accept it. Can you
explain this and provide any official information you have
regarding acceptable names?

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have nothing further to add to my email of 15 July. Under Section 8(1)
of the Freedom of Information Act, until you provide us with your name,
we will not process your request.

Yours Sincerely

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear FOI Team,

Frankly, I am very surprised that you have adopted this approach.
It's not exactly in the spirit of the Act is it? Anyway, following
your reply yesterday, I have made some inquiries about the handling
of requests and I've found some interesting information. As you
pointed out, S8(1) does indeed state that a valid request includes
",,,the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence..."
We've agreed that the email address is valid but the law does not
specify what constitutes a name. After contacting the ICO helpline,
they agreed with me that a pseudonym is a valid name and I was
directed to Chapter 7 in the ICO's guidance note AG22 that deals
with vexatious requests (which I sincerely hope this request
doesn't end up as). Although it says that "...a request submitted
using a pseudonym is not a proper request..." it goes onto say that
public authorities are not allowed to verify the identity of the
request because the FOIA is motive and applicant blind. It also
points out that disclosures must be considered as being made to the
world at large and that the requester may have good reasons not to
draw attention to themselves. I do, indeed, good reasons for using
a pseudonym and the guidance finishes Ch7 by stating that a public
authority can not refuse to comply on the basis of the name given.

Given all this, I ask that you reconsider your position and treat
my name AND request a being valid and respond accordingly.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

p.s. – if it makes it any easier you can address me as Mr.
FOIRequester.

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your further email. Your comments have been noted, however
I have nothing further to add to my email of 15 July.

Yours Sincerely,

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear FOI Team,

For the purpose of this request, can you please specify, under S17
of the FOIA, why you refuse to comply with the request and the
exemption that you are relying upon together with any Public
Interest Test that my be applicable?

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for your further email. As stated previously, I have nothing
further to add to my email of 15 July.

Yours Sincerely,

FOI Team
Cabinet Office

show quoted sections

Dear FOI Team,

I'm not entirely sure why you are taking this line to what is a
simple question. On 18/7/08, I referred you to the ICO's guidance
note AG22 which clearly shows that the provision of a "real name"
is not required but that obviously has been ignored. The ICO has
also published the Freedom of Information Good Practice Guidance No
6 which deals with requests where there is no obvious motive or
identity. The view of both the ICO and the Information Tribunal is
that a name is not a material element when considering the request.
In fact the Tribunal stated in S v Information Commissioner and the
General Register Office (EA2006/0030; 9 May 2007) that “FOIA is,
however, applicant and motive blind. It is about disclosure to the
public, and public interests. It is not about specified individuals
or private interests.” The guidance also suggests that you consider
certain points when considering a request. If, I suspect, you
cannot answer any of them, then you must comply with the request.

It is all too clear that your approach to this request ignores
official guidance and I ask that you reconsider your decision and
respond appropriately.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear FOI Team,

The deadline for your response to my request passed on 13th August.
To date I have not received a legitimate response and I must remind
you that you have a legal obligation to provide a response by no
later than 20 working days of a request being received.

I therefore demand that you respond immediately with a response, in
accordance with S17 of the FOI, stating which exemption you are
relying on and, if applicable, a valid Public Interest Test.

It would appear from your earlier correspondence that you are
wilfully refusing to provide a response based on no legitimate
reason. I must remind you, therefore, that to intentionally refuse
to respond to a request is a offence under S77 of the FOI and, if
convicted, you would be liable for a fine. I am sure that this is
not your intention.

I expect a response by no later than Wednesday 20th August. Failure
to do so will result in an immediate appeal to the Information
Commissioner's Office.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear FOI Team,

Seeing as you have failed to respond to my request and have not
acknowledged my last 2 messages, I formally request that this is
passed to a senior officer for a review of your procedure. I ask
that you consider all the points raised in the correspondence
especially with regards to the handling of the request and if my
appeal is unsuccessful, a full answer setting out the exemptions
relied upon in refusing the request in accordance with S17 of the
Act.

I note from the Cabinet site that you will respond promptly and
always within 15 days. As you will not get this until 22/8/08, I
expect a response by no later than 5/9/08.

I look forward to hearing from soon

Dear FOI Team,

Seeing as you have failed to respond to my request and have not
acknowledged my last 2 messages, I formally request that this is
passed to a senior officer for a review of your procedure. I ask
that you consider all the points raised in the correspondence
especially with regards to the handling of the request and if my
appeal is unsuccessful, a full answer setting out the exemptions
relied upon in refusing the request in accordance with S17 of the
Act.

I note from the Cabinet site that you will respond promptly and
always within 15 days. As you will not get this until 22/8/08, I
expect a response by no later than 5/9/08.

I look forward to hearing from soon

I apologise for missing the end off my email

Yours sincerely

FOIRequester

Please see the attached letter.

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Pigott,

Thank you for your prompt reply to my appeal and I am sorry that
you still consider that my request is not valid until you get a
full name. I will, obviously, appeal to the Information
Commissioner as I believe that my request has been handled
incorrectly but before I do, I would like you to consider the
following.

Whilst looking for the Commissioner’s charter, I found the “Freedom
of Information Good Practice Guidance No 6 - Consideration of
requests without reference to the identity of the applicant or the
reasons for the request”

Having read it, I discovered that the Commissioner’s own guidance
states:

“…that requests under obvious pseudonyms should normally be
considered, unless there is reason to think that any of the matters
below need to be taken into account. There are three obvious
exceptions under the Act to this general principle:

• The first is in relation to the consideration of whether a
request is vexatious or repeated. The identity of the applicant
will need to be known to decide whether a request is repeated;
knowledge of the applicant’s identity and of their previous conduct
may be a relevant factor in considering whether a request is
vexatious.

• The second is where the applicant requests information that
amounts to their own personal data, which is exempt under section
40(1).

• The third is for the purposes of the aggregation of costs under
the Fees Regulations.

My request is neither vexatious nor repeated – This is my first
request to the Prime Minister’s Office and the subject matter is
not vexatious as it refers directly to the PM’s comments about food
wastage. Food waste is clearly not personal information and as for
aggregation purposes, there is nothing to aggregate.

I was also discussing my request with friends yesterday and someone
mentioned that food waste might be environmental and that there was
a law covering it. I've checked out the Information Commissioner's
website and I discovered that the Environmental Information
Regulations probably cover my request and that you should have
dealt with it under these terms.

I’ve taken the opportunity to read the EIR to see what it covers
and environmental information includes, under S2(b), waste. In my
opinion, food waste is clearly environmental and as such, my
request should have been dealt with as such factors, such as
substances, energy, noise, radiation or waste, including
radioactive waste, emissions, discharges and other releases into
the environment, affecting or likely to affect the elements of the
environment…”

In addition the Good Practice guide also states that “…under the
EIR the reference is to making environmental information available
on request; there is no reference to the provision of a name.”

It is my understanding that it is the responsibility of the public
authority to identify a request as environmental and not the
requester. After all, I didn’t know about it until now. The
regulations require disclosure within 20 working days and
therefore, seeing as my original request was made on 13th July
2008, you are well beyond that time limit and I expect you to
release the information by next Tuesday 2nd September. If you do
not or if you refuse to comply that is when I will appeal to the
ICO.

I note that you have sent a copy of your response to the ICO – I
will be sure to refer them to that and the responses to my request.
As a final courtesy, could you please acknowledge your receipt of
this message?

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear FOI Team,

On 8th October, I received a letter from the ICO with regards to my
appeal. This informed me that my appeal had been upheld and that a
letter had been sent to you (and copied to me)requiring you to
respond to my request within 10 working days of receiving their
letter. The letter was dated 4/10/2008 and, given that I received
the letter on 8/10 and that I allowed a extra couple of days for
postage, the 10 working day limit is now passed and you have failed
to respond.

I noted that the ICO's letter was not a formal decision notice but
if you failed to respond, a decision notice will be issued. If you
fail to respond to that, I will ask the ICO to enforce the notice.

To avoid that, I expect you to send me a response by no later than
1700 on Friday 24th October 2008.

Yours sincerely,

FOIRequester

Dear Sir/Madam

Please find attached response to your FOI request of 13 July 2008.

Regards

Lisa

Lisa Parrin
Facilities Manager
CabinetOffice
Financial and Estate Management

Tel 020 7276 5477
Fax 020 7276 6101
E-mail [email address]
Web www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk <http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/>
Making government work better

P Think of the Environment - Please don't print this e-mail unless you
really need to.

The Cabinet Office computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes.

show quoted sections