Request
I refer to a previous Freedom of Information response published on 13 April 2018 at the following link:
Workforce modernisation implementation costs (FOI)
Please provide all emails and associated attachments and any other correspondence, either paper or electronic, related to answering this FOI question.
Response
Emails logged by the Central Freedom of Information unit and the Chief Minister’s Department Freedom of Information contact have been redacted and provided within the attached files.
CMD emails - Redacted
CFU emails - Redacted
Attachments that are duplicates have been omitted.
We note that it is not possible to perform a further search for emails in relation to the previous FOI response as to perform such a search requires the requester to provide a specific sender and recipient. Emails are searched through the use of an email archiving system and the parameters of search must be specific and limited in extent.
There are no records held in paper format in relation to this request.
Redactions have been applied under the following articles of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011:
Article 25 Personal information
(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018.
(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –
(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005; and
(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.
Article 25 is an absolute exemption and as such, does not carry a public interest test. Information is absolutely exempt if it can identify an individual.
Article 39 Employment
Information is qualified exempt information if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice pay or conditions negotiations that are being held between a public authority and –
(a) an employee or prospective employee of the authority; or
(b) representatives of the employees of the authority.
The Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) is withholding the release of certain information as it relates to employment negotiations. Article 39 is a qualified exemption, which means that a public interest test and prejudice test are required to be undertaken by the SPA.
The information redacted under Article 39 was utilised in a draft response to the previous FOI request. Although there is a need for transparency from public authorities, this information relates to a draft Freedom of Information response which was not released as the information was deemed incorrect. The SPA needs the ability to consider the data to be released in order to ensure that such data is accurate. Providing incorrect information which has been produced during a drafting process is not in the public’s best interest.
There is further a concern raised under the prejudice test, that an employee or Union could face prejudice within negotiations by utilising incorrect information in error.
