Communications with former Minister for Equalities, Migration and Refugees: FOI release

Information requested

All communication between the Minister, Emma Roddick, and officials regarding her meeting with Dr Lynne Tammi-Connelly to discuss her campaign for an apology for children trafficked to the colonies and the Tinker Experiments in general. More specifically, the content of communications which advised her not to meet to discuss the aforementioned as doing so 'would be prejudicial to independent research being undertaken on the subject' and not to meet Dr Lynne Tammi-Connelly when she reached the Scottish Parliament on 23rd January 2024 for similar reasons.

Response

I enclose a copy of some of the information you have requested.

Exemptions under Section 38(1)(b) of FOISA applies to some of the information you have requested because it is personal data of a third party, for example, names and contact details of officials, 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.

Exemptions under section 36(1) of FOISA (confidentiality in legal proceedings) applies to some of the information requested because it is legal advice and disclosure would breach legal professional privilege. 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 some public interest in release as part of open and transparent government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the strong public interest in maintaining the right to confidentiality of communications between legal advisers and clients, to ensure that Ministers and officials are able to receive legal advice in confidence, like any other public or private organisation.

Exemptions under section 30(b)(i) and 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank advice and exchange of views) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice and views. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice and views to Ministers before the Scottish Government reaches a settled position and public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice and views as the Government explores its position on historical actions will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future, particularly because these discussions relate to considering our current position and our relationships with stakeholders, while we await further information from research that will inform future decisionmaking.

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 and views to Ministers, as part of the process of exploring the Government’s position until the Government can adopt a position that is sound and likely to be effective.This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that good decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers and officials, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process and affect relationships with stakeholders, which would not be in the public interest.

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 202400404916 - Information released - Annex

File type

14 page PDF

File size

383.6 kB