Another FOI waste of time?

[Whenurhappy]

For anyone with a few spare minutes, on the MOD home page, recent FOI request are listed. This one caught my eye of a complete waste of time and abuse of the system - 'who provides RAF braid?'

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/386975/RAF_Officer_Braid.pdf

[Daysleeper]

It's probably just someone who makes / sells braid and want's to see what the market is, find out who the incumbent suppliers are etc etc. It's hardly a complex or vexatious request compared to some you see come up on "what do they know" .

Edit to add, here's a cracker...

Would it be possible for technical details regarding the now retired
UGM-27 Polaris Chevaline Re-entry Body (ReB) / Re-entry Vehicle, to be
made available.
details such as:
Process of Manafacture
Weight
Geometry
Length
Diameter
Angles
Radius of each sloping section Probably came with a self addressed envelope to Kim, N Korea.

[Mechta]

Daysleeper, presumably the FAST Museum at Farnborough was closed on the day our NK friends tried to visit, otherwise they would have seen the Chevaline there.

http://fas.org/nuke/guide/uk/slbm/chevaline1.jpg

[Whenurhappy]

Yes, that is a bit more interesting that RAF Officers' Braid; granted!

But even so, such a mundane enquiry would have consumed several hours of staff time of several different people within the MOD.

[Two's in]

The principle is when taxpayers money is being used, the taxpayer has a "right" to know some of the details around that. If the FOI system was filtered on someone's view of usefulness of the the inquiry, not much would get done. As suggested above, somebody might be seeing if there is a business opportunity, or checking the existing deal is fair and transparent. Once you let someone filter on a whim, the dark corners of Government abuse become even darker.

[Whenurhappy]

I appreciate the right to know principle, but the issue is trying to get the balance right (between the relative importance of the information in the Public domain vs the expenditure of Public money to obtain it), and how that balance is determined

[Pontius Navigator]

I put a request to my local council on the cost of installation, cost of policing, and expected revenue for the parking meters they were proposing to install. Essentially their business plan. The answer was staggering; they said they did not have the information.

The meters were duly installed on the stated date. SIX WEEKS LATER all the meters were changed for solar powered ones where you have to enter your vehicle registration. I should ask the cost of that operation.

[racedo]

FOI's are the only tool the taxpayer has for uncovering the way those in bureaucracy spend OUR money.

[Chugalug2]

FOI's are the only tool the taxpayer has for uncovering the way those in bureaucracy spend OUR money. Perhaps more importantly they are the only way to uncover the wanton wasting of our money.

The real problem though is, having determined that, getting anything done about it. The direct result of the introduction of FoI has been the closing of ranks among the upper echelons.

[tucumseh]

PN, that is a classic example of the most bizarre part of the legislation. The answer does not have to be truthful.

Initially, when MoD answered questions, they would include a statement outlining what to do if you thought the answer contained;

1. Errors of fact
2. Subjective comments
3. Opinion or comment based on factually incorrect information

However, once the Information Commissioner ruled there was no need to do this, they stopped.

In many ways this worked against MoD, because one way round it is to have more than one person submit precisely the same question. MoD "classifies" the originator and will have different parts of MoD answer the question depending on ones status. The best example is the Mull of Kintyre case, when D/ Air Staffs lied to a family member, but a Sqn Ldr at Yeovilton provided a truthful answer to the same question when submitted by a member of the public. The information he provided formed the basis of the evidence that cleared the pilots.

[Union Jack]

This one caught my eye of a complete waste of time and abuse of the system - 'who provides RAF braid?' - Whenurhappy

There's always the possibility that it could be another FOI request from Typhoon93 , looking ahead....:rolleyes:

Jack

[Pontius Navigator]

The answer to the OP is both obvious and simple.

It is supplied either by the station tailor or a military tailor. The station tailor may well source it from Stores aka Supply, aka Logistics.

[ShotOne]

Should it be a controversy? The OP apparently feels it was an unreasonable question. There will be instances where secrecy is necessary but surely, in general, taxpayers have a right to know where their money is spent?

[MightyGem]

The answer was staggering; they said they did not have the information.
That's the same answer that I got when I asked Merseyside Police how much they were paying for Air Support under the new National Police Air Support set up. :ugh:

[Whenurhappy]

Should it be a controversy? The OP apparently feels it was an unreasonable question. There will be instances where secrecy is necessary but surely, in general, taxpayers have a right to know where their money is spent?

I refer you to my comments at post No 6: I appreciate the right to know principle, but the issue is trying to get the balance right (between the relative importance of the information in the Public domain vs the expenditure of Public money to obtain it), and how that balance is determined


There's always the possibility that it could be another FOI request from Typhoon93 , looking ahead....

That thought had crossed my mind, too!

[airpolice]

D'you mean looking ahead to when he needs to buy his own, or in order to set up a business to supply it since he can't be a Pilot?

[Pontius Navigator]

Tread drift, but my old school used to use FO braid for the upper sixth. Braid was sewn on each lapel.

Cheaper that a school shop special blazer or badge.

No idea where they got the idea from.

[ShotOne]

Whenurhappy, re getting the balance right, why should this be a big cost? Why can't spending details -of OUR money be published on a website?

I agree there will be instances where official secrecy or commercial confidentiality may intervene but surely the default setting ought to be openness?

[Union Jack]

Typhoo-93

D'you mean looking ahead to when he needs to buy his own, or in order to set up a business to supply it since he can't be a Pilot? - Airpolice

Not really my cup of tea!:D

Jack

[tucumseh]

Some while ago I was asked by an MP to prepare a report into an accident.

As required under the OSA, I immediately advised MoD of this to give them the opportunity to comment/object. Their only comment was that should I wish to quote from a very specific investigative report I should formally seek a copy under FOI. This was done, and they denied all knowledge of it, despite me naming the author and 6 main recipients! I sought legal advice and was assured I could quote the report (or, to be precise, the evidence to the investigator) as MoD had dug a hole for themselves by lying.

Upon completion, I submitted the complete report expecting extensive demands for redaction or removal; especially relating to this investigation. But no, not a single request, despite it naming staffs who had committed grave offences, including withholding details of the above investigation from both BoI and Coroner.

Make of this what you will. My conclusions were (a) the FOI system is in disarray to a laughable extent, (b) MoD are primarily concerned with protecting certain individuals, yet (c) wholly unconcerned over it being revealed publicly that their staff commit serious offences, directly linked to deaths of Servicemen.

Oh what fun it is to......

[Bigbux]

FOI deals with information that is recorded electronically. If the information is not recorded electronically then there is no obligation to release it under FOI.

Where information is recorded in a format that differs from that in the demanded answer, and the expense of reformatting it would cost more than £50, a charge may be quoted for producing the answer or an answer may be withheld.

There are circumstances where information may be withheld i.e. National Security or commercial confidentiality, but there are (simple) tests to be applied before citing these grounds for refusal.

Different Govt departments suffer from their own cultures as far as FOI is concerned. The Department is not supposed to lie, but the the Police Forces, MoD and BBC have sometimes failed to cover themselves in glory in this area; the BBC and Police spending tax money on fighting legal requests from the Data Commissioner's Office. It's partly understandable, as the the first 2 have to inculcate secrecy into their DNA - I make no further comment on the BBC.

Where the information has already been released or is available elsewhere, a simple reference to this source is all that is required.

FOI offers a great opportunity for military folk to develop non-core skills - in particular the pro-active use of marketing (see the RAF website). A simple link to the DE&S website could have deflected the enquiry about braid. Likewise, considering the presentational aspects of a matter (from the viewpoint of those that may disagree with you or wish to oppose you) and pre-releasing information can be a great time saver.

[Innominate]

Bigbux is not quite correct - FOI relates to any information held by a public body, not just information held electronically. The fee relates to the cost of finding the required information (for example, time spent searchibg through paper or electronic filing systems) rather than simply the cost of reformatting information. An enquirer can request that the information is provided in a particular format, and nowadays this is quite likely to be some sort of electronic format, but a reply on paper would be equally acceptable if the enquirer had not specified a format.

Public bodies are encouraged to make information available via their websites, to avoid the need to respond to requests; this includes publishing the results of previous FOI requests, suitably redacted to remove the enquirers' identities as required under Data Protection legislation.

[ShotOne]

Having served in both Police and military, the ratio of "real" secrets protected by official secrecy versus incompetence and malpractice was around 1:10 . Put in a practical context, there was an obvious and genuine need for the addresses due for drugs raids to remain secret...but a less genuine need to hide that we actually got one of them wrong and levered open the wrong door!

[Bigbux]

Innominate

General right of access to information held by public authorities.

(1)Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled—
(a)to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and
(b)if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.


I stand corrected - I should put you in touch with a Public Information Officer I once worked with!!!:uhoh:

[Al R]

In the aftermath of the shooting (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21012670), the BBC info about disciplinary offences on navy subs was illuminating though. God knows what was happening on Victorious.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/2013/newsspec_4956/data/disciplinary.xls

[Cows getting bigger]

I'm considering the following FOI request:

"Please confirm how much MOD staff time and, where appropriate, bandwidth was wasted on a pilot's Internet forum discussing an FOI request regarding rank braid."