Accrington Web - Expenses, expenses...

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)

- General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)

- - Expenses, expenses... (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/expenses-expenses-45851.html)

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688137)

I am very much in favour of the Freedom Of Information Act. But I would ask one question to anybody on Accy Web.

If somebody was seeking information on you, do you not think that you have the right to ask why they want that information?

Yes but also i would ask why not ask me myself instead of going down that route ... but then im only me ... not a councillor.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688137)

I fail to understand what all the fuss is about on this issue and if one was seeking information on myself refering to the Freedom of information Act it wouldnt bother me at all unless i was worried about it for some reason which i dont think is the case with the person concerned, if you feel the need to ask why one is seeking the information then yes why not, thats my view on it.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688137)

Yes, because othewise it would become a bit of a mockery, and means that some information, in this case the identity of the person/body requesting the information, is not freely available.

Unless of course the person of whom the information is being sought, puts in their own question using the Freedom of Information Act, so as to discover the identity of the person requesing the information on them in the first place.

That could go on for ever, and I'm sure there are much more worth while things public servants could be employed doing, such as making sure forms are filled in accurately, so that we we don't miss out on any money that's going begging that we would have been entitled to, if they'd had been filled in correctly.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688137)

I am sorry but I don't see why you should have the right to know who is asking about you. After all you are part of the public body the Council so the act applies to you. Even some private emails you may send or recieve from your HBC email account could be requested under FOI see below

Quote:

b) Personal written communications (emails, etc)

In most circumstances private emails sent or received by staff in the workplace would not be held by the authority as it has no interest in them. It will be a question of fact and degree whether a public authority does hold them, dependent on the level of access and control it has over the e mail system and on the computer use policies. It is likely to be the exception rather than the rule that the public authority does hold them.
Problems can arise with hybrid emails, those which contain a mixture of personal content and that relating to the duties of the employee. The information which falls within the latter classification is potentially disclosable, and so as part of good email management the formulation of such emails should be avoided.

Anyone contacting the Council by letter or email can always state it is in confidence and should not be disclosed as the info below says.

Quote:

b) Circumstances where it may be unclear whether private information
would be subject to the Act.

There is a possible further category of information, namely information being deposited subject to conditions. In such cases it will often be considered incorrect to disclose information if there was a clear risk that the owner would demand its return or if the depositor had a reasonable expectation that disclosure would not take place. In these circumstances, the public authority which receives the request should check with the depositor, or surviving relatives, who will be able to advise the authority as to their wishes and expectations.
Where the depositor of the information objects to its disclosure, it will usually be found that an exemption can be applied to it . Exemptions which could apply are:
• Information available by other means;
• Personal Information;
• Information provided in confidence;
• Prejudice to commercial interests;
• Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs

Furthermore, if the information is due for future publication (even at an unspecified date), there would be a good public interest argument to withhold its disclosure until that time if the owner or indeed other depositors would be likely to withdraw the information.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

I'm just Wondering if the FOI act can be used for data held on file by HBC, about an individuals personal financial affairs and status:confused:

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 688262)

I'm just Wondering if the FOI act can be used for data held on file by HBC, about an individuals personal financial affairs and status:confused:

FOI.

The Leader said we only keep records on taxi Drivers for 6 months. I asked about a driver and 'Records had been lost prior to 2002 BUT since then I had his full criminal record."

Obviously personal details are confidential but statistical data exists.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 688278)

That's very refreshing to know, puts my mind at rest knowing that people can't just stick their nose into my business willy nilly on a whim:rolleyes:

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 688608)

That's very refreshing to know, puts my mind at rest knowing that people can't just stick their nose into my business willy nilly on a whim:rolleyes:

Didn't know you were a taxi driver Jaysay:rolleyes:

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by claytonender (Post 688613)

Didn't know you were a taxi driver Jaysay:rolleyes:

Thought Graham was talking about very bodies personal details not just cab drivers, now you've started me worrying again claytonender:D

Re: Expenses, expenses...

On the Freedom Of information question it wasn't necessarily to go over old ground, covering Andrew's F.O.I request.

But it was as much about raising the issues of Rights, which it seems to me is the centre of any F.O.I request.

The person making a F.O.I Request has ever right to make that request, and I would defend that. But then you come to the question of rights for the people who are having F.O.I made against them. What right's do they have if any?

Anyway it made for quite an interesting debate, with some really good contributions.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688818)

I would say none.....if you enter public life you are there to be shot at. :)

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688818)

The person making a F.O.I Request has ever right to make that request, and I would defend that. But then you come to the question of rights for the people who are having F.O.I made against them. What right's do they have if any?

Very little I would have thought, all part of working for a public service that comes under the Freedom of Information Act. Not sure if you can request Council Officers wages - I think you should be able too though.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

I think if Graham had paid for the personal calls himself it would have been deducted from the total before the data was compiled.

I also think that if he wanted to make personal calls and was willing to pay for them himself then he shouldn't have used the contract phone/sim card made available to him by the council.

In ANY job you are requested to keep work and personal life separate. I don't think it was appropriate to use the number used for business to make personal calls to family. I work for a specific department at university that requires mobile phones and the staff often carry 2, sometimes 3 mobiles phones with them for different uses and their personal calls are restricted to their only personal mobile phones.

It's sad that your grandmother was ill, but I still don't think it justifies the lack of sense here.

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Owen (Post 688137)

NO , if you are a pig at the public trough the public has a right to know how many truffles you are gobbling up , this applies to any employee paid from the pubic purse , elected or not , infact I would go so far as to say any Council/Govt. employees, job description, resume and qualifications should be open to public scrutiny to ensure taxpayers are getting the best value for money :eek:

Re: Expenses, expenses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 688991)

I agree up to the point about qualifications and resume. These aren't really always a guarantee of 'quality' or 'value for money' and I don't think the general public are in a better position to decide such a thing other than those who are experienced in the field themselves and know what the job requires.

I think Robert Owen is wrong to suggest those requesting information should be prepared to declare their own details either because at the end of the day, that person isn't being paid by the public and it should be a right to have access to that information and it is already more along the lines of a permission rather than a right as it is.