Angela Constance's Oslo trip and Angus Robertson's Tartan Week trip: FOI release

Information requested

• The full costs of Angela Constance's trip to Oslo in March, including how many officials she took with her, their expenses, and cost of hotels/travel there, including the name of the hotel she stayed in.
• The full itinerary from her time in Oslo, and all minutes/notes from meetings she held there.
• All correspondence sent and received by the government, including internally, all briefings, notes/minutes from meetings and all analysis done on a ban on glue traps for mice and rats, and include any details of when/how a UK internal market Act exemption was request, between October 1 2023 and the date of this FOI.
• The full costs of Angus Robertson's trip to Tartan Week in April, including how many officials he took with him, their expenses, and cost of hotels/travel there, including the name of hotel he stayed in.

Response

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs travelled to Oslo to learn about the approaches towards criminal justice in Norway accompanied by a Private Secretary and two policy officials and stayed at the Thon Hotel Slottsparken. Accommodation costs totalled £1247.17 + NOK5688 and travel was £1344.73. Other expenses came to £261.12.

Requested details of the meetings that the Cabinet Secretary undertook are attached in the enclosed annex. An exemption under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (personal information) applies to a small amount of the information requested because it is personal data of a third party 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 30(c) of FOISA (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) applies to a small amount of the information requested. It is essential for Ministers to be able to meet with external stakeholders on a range of issues. Disclosing the content of these meetings, particularly without the consent of the stakeholder, is likely to undermine their trust in the Scottish Government and will substantially inhibit communications on this type of issue in the future. These stakeholders will be reluctant to provide their views fully and frankly if they believe that their views are likely to be made public, particularly while these discussions relate to sensitive issues. This would significantly harm the Government’s ability to carry out many aspects of its work, and could adversely affect its ability to gather all of the evidence it needs to make fully informed policies.

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 Ministers and officials a private space within which to meet with appropriate external stakeholders as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government’s policy positions. This private space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, so that good policy decisions can be taken based on fully informed advice and evidence.

The information you have requested in relation to a proposed ban on glue traps is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), and we are therefor required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.

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, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.

Some of the information that you have requested can be found on the Scottish Government website where you will find analysis and a link to reports and minutes of meetings of the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission. Under regulation 6(1)(b) of the EIRs, we do not have to provide you with information if it is already reasonably accessible to you.

The then Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance Shona Robison wrote to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Steve Barclay on 31st March 2024 to express concern over the UK Government’s refusal of an Internal Market Act exclusion which would allow Scotland to ban the sale of glue traps – despite such a ban being voted for unanimously by the Scottish Parliament in the Wildlife Management and Muirburn Act. Further information in relation to the legislation can be found on the Scottish Parliament website.

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, under the exception at regulation 10(4)(b) of the EIRs a public authority may refuse a request for information if it is ‘manifestly unreasonable’. The Scottish Information Commissioner’s guidance on the regulation 10(4)(b) exception at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/Law/EIRs/EIRsExceptions.aspx says that there may “be instances where it is appropriate for the Commissioner to consider the proportionality of the burden on the public authority in terms of the costs and resources involved in dealing with a request when considering the application of this exception”.

In this case, there is a considerable volume of information relating to this topic and we therefor consider that your request is manifestly unreasonable and so we are refusing it under regulation 10(4)(b).

As the exception is conditional we have applied the ‘public interest test’. This means we have, in all the circumstances of this case, considered if the public interest in disclosing information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in information about a ban on glue traps, this is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the efficient and effective use of public resources by not incurring excessive costs when complying with information requests.

You may however wish to consider reducing the scope of your request in order to make it manageable, either by narrowing the timescale or more tightly focussing the scope of the correspondence you seek for example to request copies of correspondence or briefing in relation to the IMA specifically. You may also find it helpful to look at the Scottish Information Commissioner’s ‘Tips for requesting information under FOI and the EIRs’ on his website at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/YourRights/Tipsforrequesters.aspx.

The Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture visited Washington, D.C. and New York City to promote Scotland to North America as a place to live, work, study and do business. He also took part in a range of other diaspora and cultural events, including this year’s Tartan Day parade in New York City honouring the contributions that American Scots have made to the US.

'Tartan Week', in the days leading up to the annual Tartan Day parade up 6th Avenue, included a range of events held across the USA to celebrate Scottish arts and culture, as well as traditional music, food and drink. As a showcase of Scottish culture and heritage in the US, Tartan Week is also a major opportunity for the culture and creative sectors in Scotland to reach new audiences and markets.

The Cabinet Secretary was accompanied by a Private Secretary and they stayed in the Fitzpatrick Grand Central hotel at a total cost of $1914.42. Travel costs including flights, rail travel from Washington D.C. to New York City, and public transport/taxi costs totalled £3096.82 + $343.89. Other subsistence expenses totalled $367.61. Four members of the Scottish Government's USA Office travelled by rail from Washington D.C. to participate in the New York part of the programme. The accommodation costs in New York City for the Washington D.C. based officials totalled $3828.84, their travel costs were £1425.71 + $199.49, and other expenses totalled £191.23 + $44.51.

The US is Scotland’s most important international trading partner, its largest export destination and source of inward investment, and its third biggest market for non-EU international students. The Cabinet Secretary met a range of existing and potential investors during his time in the US to encourage greater connections, and greater trade and investment between both countries. You can find more information on the importance of trade between Scotland and the US on the Scottish Government website.

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 202400412095 - Information Released - Annex

File type

17 page PDF

File size

280.0 kB