Assisted Reproduction Unit (FOI)

Request

Please provide a copy of the independent review of Jersey's Assisted Reproduction Unit (ARU) - which was carried out as part of planned revamp of the service. For your reference, please see Government press release referring to the independent review and audit.

Response

Due to the nature of the request and the timing of service review / development, Article 35 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. This information qualifies as exempt as it relates to the formulation and development of any proposed policy by a public authority.

Article applied

Article 35 Formulation and development of policies

Information is qualified exempt information if it relates to the formulation or development of any proposed policy by a public authority.

Public Interest Test

Article 35 is a qualified exemption, which means that a public interest test has to be undertaken to examine the circumstances of the case and decide whether, on balance, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Although there is a need for transparency, accountability, financial and good decision making by public authorities this information relates to an ongoing situation. The Scheduled Public Authority (“SPA”) – and indeed good government, requires Ministers to be provided with full, frank advice from officials about the possible impact of proposed policy, and for Ministers and officials to be able to discuss and test those proposed policies in a comprehensive way.

The following considerations were taken into account:

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure

• disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public, providing confirmation that the necessary discussions have taken place

• disclosure to the public fulfils an educative role about the early stages in policy development and illustrates how the department engages with parties for this purpose

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information

• in order to best develop policy, Officers and Ministers need a safe space in which free and frank discussion can take place. The need for this safe space is considered at its greatest during the live stages of a policy. Sharing views is important to ensure that all relevant considerations are taken into account in developing and implementing policy. Disclosure at a time when these views are still being considered would negatively impact the Department’s ability to fully consider the information

• the need for this safe space is considered at its greatest during the live stages of a policy

• release of the information at this stage might generate misinformed debate in areas where future options have yet to be finalised. This would affect the ability of officials to consider and develop policy away from external pressures, and to advise Ministers appropriately

• disclosure of this information may limit the willingness of parties to provide their honest views and feedback in future. This would hamper and harm the policy–making process not only in relation to this subject area but in respect of future policy development across wider Departmental business

Taking into account the various factors, the SPA decided in favour of withholding the redacted information.