Carbon Removers and Green Hydrogen export to Germany: FOI release

Information requested

“Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from the meeting, and briefings, about John Swinney's visit to the  Carbon Removers on December 10  2024? Between November 15 2024 and December 30 2024” and

“Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from meetings, and briefings and analysis, about Scottish Government plans to export green hydrogen to Germany by ship, between December 1 2024 and March 1 2025”.

Response

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

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some of the information you have requested because an exemption(s) under section(s) s.38(1)(b) (personal information) of FOISA applies to that information.

An exemption under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (personal information) also applies to some 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.

Some of the information you have requested is available from the following websites:

• Hydrogen Backbone Link: Connecting Scotland to Europe
• Review of demand for hydrogen derivatives and products | ClimateXChange

​​​​​​​Under section 25(1) of FOISA, we do not have to give you information which is already reasonably accessible to you. If, however, you do not have internet access to obtain this information from the website(s) listed, then please contact me again and I will send you a paper copy.

​​​​​​​While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some the information you have requested because an exemption(s) under section(s):

s.28 - Substantial prejudice to UK relations
s.29(1)(a) - Formulation/development of government policy
s.30(b)(i) - Substantial inhibition to free and frank provision of advice
s.30(b)(ii) - Substantial inhibition to free and frank exchange of views
s.32(1)(a) - Substantial prejudice to international relations
s.33(1)(b) - Substantial prejudice to commercial interests
s.36(1) - Confidentiality of communications
s.39(1) - Endangerment to health or safety

​​​​​​​Exemption s.28 (Substantial prejudice to UK relations) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in allowing a space where officials from both the UK and Scottish governments can communicate confidentially regarding areas of public interest including policy development and trade. It would therefore not be in the public interest to disclose information which may prejudice the vital relationships between the governments of the UK.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.29(1)(a) (Formulation/development of government policy) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the public is not mislead by earlier or unfinished drafts of documentation, especially when such documentation already exists public. It is not therefore in the public interest to release information which is related to government policy in early development because it may mislead the public on government policy.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.30(b)(i) (Substantial inhibition to free and frank provision of advice) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in officials being able to effectively advise ministers on sensitivities and various confidential issues for consideration in policy development without the pressure of these being made public, as to do so could prejudice officials’ ability to be free and frank in their advice, which would not be in the public interest.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.30(b)(ii) (Substantial inhibition to free and frank exchange of views) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in officials being able to discuss openly their views on various issues related to their work in order to fulfil their duties to the public and government ministers, as to do so could prejudice the ability of officials to express their views in the free and frank way required for the effective execution of our roles in government, and this would not be in the public interest.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.32(1)(a) (Substantial prejudice to international relations) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in being able discuss topics of relevance in relation to other countries, without the risk that those confidential communications could be made public unexpectedly, in part or whole, which could cause harm to the trust or relationship between the UK and other nations, which would not be in the public interest.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.33(1)(b) (Substantial prejudice to commercial interests) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in officials being able to confidentially engage with businesses to gain an understanding of developments relevant to our strategies and economic interests as a country, as for this information to be released could prejudice the trust which industry shows in their engagement with the government. This includes the release of confidential information relating to business plans, models, assessments, and projects in development, as to do so would not be in the public interest.

​​​​​​​Exemption s.36(1) (Confidentiality of communications) 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 because disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, this is outweighed by the public interest in the ability of ministers and officials to discuss confidential information which is not in the public domain without the risk it may be released too early, which is essential when topics discussed are at a preliminary stage or early stages of consideration, as to do so could prejudice trust and the ability of officials and Ministers to engage stakeholders effectively in the execution of their roles, which would not be in the public interest.

​​​​​​​An exemption under section 39(1) of FOISA applies to some of the information you have requested as its disclosure would, or would be likely to, endanger the health or the safety of an individual.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Exemption s.39(1) (Endangerment to health and safety) 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. However, there is a greater public interest in ensuring the health and safety of individuals.

About FOI

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

FOI 202500464787 - Information Released - Annex

File type

PDF

File size

3.3 MB