Ministerial visit briefings and expenses: FOI release

Information requested

1. All minutes and briefings/notes taken during Neil Gray's visit to Iceland in June 2023, including his itinerary for the trip.

2. All minutes and briefings/notes, including copies of speeches, taken during Humza Yousaf's visit to Brussels, including his itinerary for the trip.

3. All discussion briefings/notes and correspondence internally and externally, including emails between the Scottish Government and outside bodies, regarding plans for an 'envoy to the EU' as suggested by Humza Yousaf during his speech at the SNP June summit.

4. All expenses receipts submitted by Humza Yousaf for his trip to London between April 24 and 26, and all minutes and briefings/notes from his trip, including his itinerary for the trip.

5. All expenses and receipts submitted by Patrick Harvie for his trip to Copenhagen in April.

Response

I enclose a copy of most of the information you requested. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some the information you have requested because exemption(s) under a number of sections of FOISA applies to that information. The reasons why these exemptions apply are explained below.

1. In response to the first part of your request, you can find attached the briefing for Mr. Gray’s trip to Iceland, which contains his itinerary. We also attach the respective minutes of his meetings with Deputy Prime Minister of Luxembourg, Ms. Paulette Lenert; colleagues from the Fossar Investment Bank; and colleagues at the Carbfix Geothermal plant. An exemption under section 32(1)(a)(i) of FOISA (international relations) applies to some of the information requested. The notes taken during meetings with Icelandic Government Ministers and some elements of the briefing related to engagements with the Icelandic Government are not included in the release. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially relations between the United Kingdom and the government of Iceland. The effective conduct of international relations depends upon maintaining trust and confidence between the UK Government and other States. In this case, disclosing information about Scottish Government engagement with Iceland would substantially prejudice relations between the UK and Iceland because there is a need to maintain confidential dialogue in order to ensure that future engagement can take place in a spirit of trust and openness.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in ensuring that the UK Government is able to maintain good relations with other States, in order to protect and promote UK interests abroad. There can be no public interest in jeopardising those relations by the Scottish Government disclosing this information.”

An exemption under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (personal information) applies to some of the information requested because it is personal data of a third party. The names of individuals have been removed from the briefing and notes of meetings where appropriate because and disclosing these would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption.

An exemption under section 30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice) applies to a small amount of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to Ministers before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice on a suggested forward look of trade & investment focussed Ministerial visits will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future, as these discussions relate to the sensitivity of this policy area. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to Ministers, as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government policy.

2. In response to the second part of your request, you can find attached the briefing for the First Minister’s trip to Brussels, engagement reports, and copies of speeches. An exemption under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (personal information) applies to some of the information requested because it is personal data of a third party, ie names of individuals, and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption.

An exemption under section 33(1)(b) of FOISA (commercial interests) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure of this particular information would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially the commercial interests of private companies. It is not within the remit or duties of a public authority to disclose information which could substantially prejudice or harm commercial interests of an organisation in the private sector. Having considered the information withheld, it is not in the public interest to disclose this information”.

Exemptions under sections 30(b)(i) and 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank advice and exchange of views) apply to some the information requested. These exemptions apply because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice and exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation. The exemptions recognise the need for Ministers to have a private space within which to seek advice and views from officials . Disclosing the content of free and frank briefing material could substantially inhibit such briefing in the future.

These exemptions are subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemptions. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemptions. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide free and frank advice and views to Ministers in briefing. It is clearly in the public interest that Ministers can properly and robustly defend the Government’s policies and decisions. They need full and candid advice from officials to enable them to do so. Premature disclosure of this type of information could lead to a reduction in the comprehensiveness and frankness of such advice and views in the future, which would not be in the public interest.

3. In response to the third part of your request, you can find attached note regarding an ‘envoy to the EU’. Exemptions under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (personal information) and sections 30(b)(i) and 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank advice and exchange of views) also apply to some the information requested.

4. As above, in response to the fourth part of your request exemptions sections 30(b)(i) and 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank advice and exchange of views), section 33(1)(b) of FOISA (commercial interests) and apply to some the information requested. Additionally, an exemption under section 29(1) (a) of FOISA (formulation or development of government policy) applies to some the information requested because it relates to the development of Scottish Government’s policy. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in high quality policy and decision-making, and in the properly considered implementation and development of policies and decisions. This means that Ministers and officials need to be able to consider all available options and to debate those rigorously, to fully understand their possible implications. Their candour in doing so will be affected by their assessment of whether the discussions on these issues will be disclosed in the near future, when it may undermine or constrain the Government’s view on that policy while it is still under discussion and development.

Finally for this section, an exemption under section 32(1)(a) of FOISA (international relations) applies to some the information requested. In this case, the information was given to the Scottish Government on the understanding that it would be treated as being in confidence. If the Scottish Government does not respect this confidence, the UK Government’s relations with other States and its ability to protect and promote UK interests will be substantially prejudiced. States are likely to be more reluctant to share sensitive information with Scotland or other parts of the United Kingdom in future, which would reduce both the frequency and openness of communications with the UK.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in ensuring that the UK Government is able to maintain good relations with other States in order to protect and promote UK interests abroad. There can be no public interest in jeopardising those relations by the Scottish Government disclosing confidential information or information which another State has specifically asked us to withhold.

Queries relating to expenses from Request 4 and 5

There were no expenses for the First Minister’s trip to London between April 24 – 26. Mr Harvie’s expense claims for the Copenhagen trip in April were as follows:

12 April 2023	Foreign Travel Night and Day Subsistence	Mr Harvie purchased a pizza and drink from Perron in Copenhagen. This amounted to 152 DKK	£17.90
13 April 2023	Foreign Travel Night and Day Subsistence	Mr Harvie purchased a Hummersuppe and Grillede Jomfruhummere from Nyhavn 37 in Copenhagen. The total cost for the food was 286 DKK.	£33.77
14 April 2023	Foreign Travel Night and Day Subsistence	Mr Harvie purchased Carbonnades from Brussels Grill on 14 April. The total cost for the meal was 18.70 euros	£16.48

Attachments providing information

The following table provides information summarising the attachments which provide the information requested. These have been organised to align with the relevant part of your request.

Attachment	Documents included
Request 1
Q1.1 Briefing	Briefing for Iceland visit – 13-15 June 2023 for Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy – Neil Gray
Q1.2 Engagement Reports	Engagement reports for Iceland visit – 13-15 June 2023 for Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy – Neil Gray
Request 2
Q2	Overseas Visit Report – Brussels, 26-28 June 2023 Briefing Pack for First Minister Visit to Brussels 26-28 June 2023 FM Brussels EPC Speech FM Brussels Friends of Scotland Speech
Request 3
Q3	EU Issues Board – April 2023 – Note of EU related statements of new FM Extract from EU Issues Board – 13 April 2023, Note of Meeting
Request 4
Q4.1	Briefing First Minister London Visit 24-25 April 2023
Q4.2	Notes First Minister London Visit 24-25 April 2023
Q4.3	Note FM – PM visit

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at http://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.

FOI 202300374237 - Information released - Attachments

File type

297 page PDF

File size

4.2 MB