Care sector – proposed Freedom of Information extension: consultation advisory group minutes – September 2025

Attendees and apologies

Apologies

• Chair – Freedom of Information (FOI) Unit, Scottish Government
• FOI Unit, Scottish Government

The following organisations were represented:

Scottish Government

• Improving Public Engagement Division, Acting Chair
• Open Government team
• Residential Childcare team, Directorate for Children and families
• FOI Unit Scottish Government

External stakeholders

• Glasgow HSCP
• Glasgow City Council
• Common Weal
• ALLIANCE Scotland
• Scotland Excel
• The Scottish Social Services Council
• Scottish Information Commissioner
• Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland (CFOIS)
• Transparency International UK
• Lived Experience member
• COSLA
• Scottish Care

Items and actions

Welcome

The acting chair welcomed participants to the meeting.

Review of outputs from previous meetings

The Scottish Government FOI Unit briefly reviewed the outputs from meetings of the three sub-groups which had met during spring and summer. This reflected output summaries already circulated to group members.

The Action log was reviewed.

It was noted that the action recorded at the first meeting of the Group, to establish the three sub-groups, was now complete.

An update was provided on the action arising from discussions in sub-group 2 for the Scottish Government FOI Unit to engage with the Scottish Information Commissioner’s office regarding the experience of pharmacists and other primary care providers in relation to FOI compliance. Specifically in relation to enforcement of the Publication Scheme duty, the Commissioner’s office had clarified that it works with governing bodies to design approved model schemes with an assumed adoption of the scheme by individual providers. A member indicated that subject to further discussion, a similar approach may be appropriate in relation to private and third sector care providers.

Action: FOI Unit to email Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland setting out the Scottish Government understanding of the position.

The FOI Unit confirmed that following the action recorded by sub-group 2 to further explore the status of respite care in discussion with social care policy colleagues, additional text had been added to the draft consultation document to make clear that temporary and short term care received from care home or care at home services does fall within scope of the proposed extension.

The FOI Unit confirmed that all proposed changes from sub-group 2 to the earlier draft of the consultation document are now reflected in the revised drafts circulated to members.

In relation to the action point recorded by sub-group 3 for the FOI Unit to develop a communications and engagement plan to support the consultation it was noted that the FOI Unit would provide an update later in the meeting.

In relation to the further action point recorded by sub-group 3 for all members to report back on how their stakeholder networks might be used to promote engagement in the consultation. It was also noted that the planned discussion later in the meeting would provide an opportunity for this to be discussed further.

Discussion of draft consultation document

There were mixed views on whether the ‘simplified’ version of the consultation document circulated to Group members alongside the second draft of the consultation document represented a preferable text to the main version. 

Some members expressed concern about less precise wording in the simplified version.  It was highlighted that discussion of issues relating to the detail of FOI law necessarily involved some complexity, and could be hard to ‘simplify’ without losing accuracy.

Others felt that the simplified version had been easier to read, and may have some merit. It was highlighted that the average reading age of an adult in Scotland is 9-11.

It was agreed that the discussion should proceed on the basis of consideration of the main second draft version. However, all participants were asked to feed back their thoughts on the ‘simplified’ version by correspondence – highlighting in particular any parts where the simplified wording is particularly helpful, or particularly unhelpful.

Action: All members with thoughts on the simplified document to feed these back to SG FOI Unit.

There was a discussion of the second draft consultation document and questions. Specific issues discussed were:

Whether the introductory questions, seeking views on the principle of extension, should ask about ‘private’ and ‘third sector’ providers separately. There was some support for this, but also concern about introducing further complexity.

Whether it is necessary to offer an ‘unsure’ option on the principle of extension. The general view was that it is necessary to offer respondents some alternative to ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ in their responses to these questions but FOI Unit would consider the right wording to describe this option.

The need to ensure that the source of all statistics referred to in the document are properly referenced.

The wording and substance of question 3(a), seeking views on the level of public funding that should result in a provider becoming subject to FOISA. Some members felt the question as drafted would be challenging for respondents to answer in an informed way.

The wording and substance of question 5 regarding the specific needs of children’s services.  It was generally agreed that this question could only be answered in an informed way by those respondents who have some experience of children’s services. However, the general view of the group was that this did not mean the question lacked value and it was important for experienced people to have the opportunity to feed in their views.  It was agreed the wording of the question should be reviewed to ensure it is sufficiently clear.

In relation to question 6, regarding whether organisation size should have any bearing on whether a provider should be made subject to FOISA, it was highlighted that any distinction in FOI obligations based on organisation size would be a departure from all previous practice in relation to FOISA designations. It was suggested that this should be made more explicit in the document.

In relation to the section on Impact Assessments, it was suggested there should be some reference to assessing Human Rights impacts. 

Action: FOI Unit to consider all comments and propose further changes to the document in light of these.

There was a discussion of the timing of the consultation. The FOI Unit advised that it is hoped to launch the consultation in the autumn 2025. It was suggested that an additional two weeks should be added to the standard 12 week consultation paper if the consultation is to run over the Christmas period, as seems likely. 

Break

discussion of impact assessments

Due to time constraints it was agreed not to undertake a detailed discussion of the Impact Assessments in the meeting. All members were asked to feed back on these by correspondence.

Action: All members to feed back their views on the draft partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment and draft Data Protection Impact Assessment to the FOI Unit.

Development of comms and engagement plan

The FOI Unit gave an overview of its discussions so far in relation to the development of a communications and engagement plan for the consultation.

Members were assured that the Scottish Government does intend to commission an Easy Read version of the consultation document, and that BSL and Audio versions are also being considered.

FOI Unit officials have engaged with policy leads for the National Care Service Lived Experience Expert Panel regarding the possibility of working with the Panel to gather evidence of lived experience to supplement the traditional consultation. A number of potential candidates (approx. 50) have been identified as meeting relevant criteria of lived experience.  Engagement could take the form of group discussion, one to one interviews or a survey. The FOI Unit will continue to scope options.

The FOI Unit has also engaged with analytical and marketing insight colleagues regarding the possibility of inclusion of a short set of survey questions within a general omnibus survey aimed at the general public. However, the initial steer from analytical and marketing colleagues is that this approach may provide limited evidence in view of the somewhat specialised nature of the subject matter.

All members were asked to consider how their organisations can contribute to the development of stakeholder engagement opportunities and events during the consultation period. It was offered that The Alliance may be able to assist in engaging with individuals with lived experience of engaging with care providers.

Action: All members to consider the best approach to engaging with their own stakeholder and feed back to FOI Unit. FOI Unit to liaise specifically with The Alliance regarding lived experience engagement.

Action: FOI Unit to develop and circulate formal written communication and engagement plan.

Next steps and action items

A further meeting of the Group may be required to further consider approaches and to finalise its recommendations.

The acting chair thanked attendees for their time and their contributions.

Any other business

No further discussion.

Meeting ended at 16:54.