Monies paid to Liberate Jersey

​Request 752398793 

I would like to know what ALL the monies paid to Liberate were for. What services were provided?  Was it a donation? 

gov.je/government/freedomofinformation/pages/foi.aspx?ReportID=7708​

Please provide this on an annual basis starting from 2017. 

Response 

Please see attached spreadsheet which provides a yearly breakdown of Government of Jersey spend, per department, with Liberate. 

​Freedom of Information response 752398793 - Table attachment.pdf​

The Government of Jersey has made no ‘donations’ to Liberate. The amounts paid were for services, including training, accessibility audits, surveys, speaking events, and the provision of equipment, or by way of grants, including for the “Pride” event.   

Internal Review Request

The response provided does not answer my question and is a very clear example of the FOI Department being deliberately difficult. The responses do not even equate to the link they provided in their answer. For example the link to the page they provide

https://www.gov.je/government/freedomofinformation/pages/foi.aspx?ReportID=77​08 shows that the monies paid to Liberate during the 2022 calendar year (as an example) was £120,075 but in the response to me it states that it was £87,325.

What happened to the rest? Who paid them £32,750 and what was it for? The only year which is reflected accurately is 2023, none of the others are correct.

You state that the 'explanation was provided in the response, i.e. training, accessibility audits, surveys, speaking events, etc.'. It was not. The only information is the department that the funds were paid by, not what service was provided.

Internal Review Response

Does the FOI request relate to a body to which the Law applies, or information held by a body covered by the Law?

If the answer is no, all the other questions are not applicable. Further questions if above is a yes:

i. Was the right information searched for and reviewed? (supply audit if possible)

ii. Was the information supplied appropriately (supply evidence if possible)

iii. Was information appropriately withheld in accordance with the articles applied and were the public interest test/ prejudice test properly applied? (supply supporting documents re the test if possible)

Following discussion, it was agreed by the Panel to overturn the decision.

Treasury and Exchequer do hold a small amount of data to confirm monies paid to Liberate however do not hold the data relating to what “monies paid to Liberate were for”, and Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies to this information.

In addition, it was agreed that a breakdown of the transaction data is considered to be Commercially Sensitive, and that some of the information contained with the breakdown would contravene Article 25 - Personal Data. It is therefore withheld under Articles 25 and 33 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Article 33 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response.

Also, in relation to donations. The Public Finances Manual (as published on Gov.je and linked below) confirms that the Government of Jersey does not make ‘Donations’. Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 therefore applies to this information.

Public Finances Manual

Further information regarding Liberate finances is detailed in their accounts which are published on their website and linked below:

About | Liberate​

Articles applied

Article 3 - Meaning of “information held by a public authority”

For the purposes of this Law, information is held by a public authority if –

(a) it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person; or

(b) it is held by another person on behalf of the authority.

Article 23 - Information accessible to applicant by other means

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it is reasonably available to the applicant, otherwise than under this Law, whether or not free of charge.

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant where the applicant may obtain the information.

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.

Article 33 - Commercial interests

Information is qualified exempt information if –

(a) it constitutes a trade secret; or

(b) its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of a person (including the scheduled public authority holding the information).

Public Interest Test

In applying this article, the following considerations were taken into account. 

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure 

• Disclosure of the information would ensure the general public are informed about the expenditure and expenses paid to Liberate by the Scheduled Public Authority (SPA). 

• Disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public. 

• Disclosure would also promote trust in the SPA by showing openness. 

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information 

• The disclosure of the breakdown of expenditure and expenses could potentially disadvantage Liberate’s and the SPA’s ability to retain commercial advantage in any future tender process. 

• This could also result in the SPA’s inability to secure best value for the taxpayer, and this will likely prejudice the SPA as its bargaining power decreases. 

• The disclosure of the breakdown of expenditure and expenses may result in misinformed public debate; therefore, this could jeopardise the business relationship between the SPA and Liberate which is essential for the successful delivery of services. Trust and confidentiality are key components of effective commercial relationships, and disclosure of sensitive financial data could erode that trust. 

All of the above points have been taken into consideration and while transparency and accountability is important, the public interest in disclosure must be weighed against potential harm caused by prejudice of the commercial interests and the risks of misinformation.

The SPA has concluded that, on balance, the risk of causing harm caused by prejudice of the commercial interests and or concerns or spreading misinformation, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the benefits disclosing the information.​