George de Carteret statue correspondence (FOI)
George de Carteret statue correspondence (FOI)Produced by the Freedom of Information office
Authored by Government of Jersey and published on 12 August 2020.
Prepared internally, no external costs.
Between 1 October 2013 and 1 May 2014, please provide all email and written correspondence between former Assistant Treasury Minister John Refault and:
former Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf
former Assistant Treasury Minister Edward Noel
former Treasurer Laura Bowley / current Treasurer Richard Bell
containing the words ‘Carteret’, ‘statue’, ‘New Jersey’, ‘donation(s)’, ‘donor(s)’ ‘percentage for art’ either in combination or separately.
It was not possible to review the emails of Philip Ozouf, Edward Noel or Laura Rowley as the system used for retrieving emails is limited to two years on a rolling basis. Please also note that no searches were undertaken on Richard Bell’s emails as he was not in post during the period specified.
Held information is attached below:
John Refault letter dated 20 January 2014 re Sir George de Carteret
Email correspondence (redacted)
The attachments have been redacted in accordance with the Article 25 (Personal Information) 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 2018; and
(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.
(3) In determining for the purposes of this Article whether the lawfulness principle in Article 8(1)(a) of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018 would be contravened by the disclosure of information, paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 2 to that Law (legitimate interests) is to be read as if sub-paragraph (b) (which disapplies the provision where the controller is a public authority) were omitted.