Comments on: Article: Problems at the Information Commissioner’s Office http://heatherbrooke.org/2005/uk-openness-watchdog-lacks-teeth/ Heather Brooke is an award-winning writer, journalist and activist Sun, 29 Apr 2012 09:44:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Rod http://heatherbrooke.org/2005/uk-openness-watchdog-lacks-teeth/comment-page-1/#comment-850 Rod Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:46:49 +0000 http://www.yrtk.org/2005/the-uk%e2%80%99s-openness-watchdog-lacks-teeth-and-transparency/#comment-850 Thank you for this article about the progress of the Information Commisioner in dealing with complaints under the FOIA & the list of outstanding cases (one of which is mine). I was looking for information about how fast the IC should respond when I found this post. My request to the Department of Health (Ref: T06011201) for the disclosure of the Wells Report into the NHS University was initially rejected on 14th Feb 2005 (under s.33 of the act) and their “internal review” upheld this decision on 27th April. I then appealed to the Information Commissioner (Ref: FAC0070878 or FS50070878 depending on which correspondence you see) and received letters/emails from his staff on 13th April (as I’d initially complained about the time taken & added the DoH decision when received), 1st August & 21st Nov. saying that they are conducting “an initial assessment” and then “continuing to review your complaint”. I understand that the IC office has received thousands of complaints & dealt with loads, but still has loads outstanding & it doesn’t help much when one of these is your own. Rod Thank you for this article about the progress of the Information Commisioner in dealing with complaints under the FOIA & the list of outstanding cases (one of which is mine). I was looking for information about how fast the IC should respond when I found this post.

My request to the Department of Health (Ref: T06011201) for the disclosure of the Wells Report into the NHS University was initially rejected on 14th Feb 2005 (under s.33 of the act) and their “internal review” upheld this decision on 27th April. I then appealed to the Information Commissioner (Ref: FAC0070878 or FS50070878 depending on which correspondence you see) and received letters/emails from his staff on 13th April (as I’d initially complained about the time taken & added the DoH decision when received), 1st August & 21st Nov. saying that they are conducting “an initial assessment” and then “continuing to review your complaint”.

I understand that the IC office has received thousands of complaints & dealt with loads, but still has loads outstanding & it doesn’t help much when one of these is your own.

Rod

]]>