NHS Fife employment tribunal queries: FOI Review

Information requested

Original request 202500476219

1. The exact date and time when Scottish Ministers were first informed that Sandie Peggie had been cleared of gross misconduct by NHS Fife. Please provide the correspondence of ministers being informed of this development and any further correspondence where ministers discuss the implications of this ruling since 1 July 2025.

2. Any briefing, information or documentation that was provided to the First Minister by Special Advisers, Senior Civil Service or NHS Fife Health Board ahead of media appearances on 16 July 2025 related to the Sandie Peggie case.

3. All correspondence between the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care or the First Minister and NHS Fife Health Board in relation to the Sandie Peggie case since 16 April 2025 including emails, letters, virtual/in-person meetings (and minutes of those meetings), phone calls or instant messages.

4. All correspondence between backbench SNP MSPs and Scottish Ministers in relation to the Sandie Peggie case since 16 April 2025 including emails, letters, virtual/in person meetings (and minutes of those meetings), phone calls or instant messages.

5. All correspondence between any Scottish Ministers in relation to the Sandie Peggie case since 16 April 2025 including emails, letters, virtual/in-person meetings (and minutes of those meetings), phone calls or instant messages.

Response

I have now completed my review of your request below:

1. All the information that was redacted on page 6 of the attachment that provided a response to question one of my request given the reference number 202500476219 with the exception of section 38 redactions.

2. All the information that was redacted on page one of the attachment provided in response to question five of my request given the reference number 202500476219 with the exception of section 38 redactions.

3. Seeking all the information contained in the emails that have been provided on the pages I’ve highlighted, even if they were out of scope for the original request.

I have provided the findings of the original decision in respect of this request below. I will provide my reasoning behind this on a point by point basis below.

1. At point 1 of your request you ask for All the information that was redacted on page 6 of the attachment that provided a response to question one of my request given the reference number 202500476219 with the exception of section 38 redactions.

I have reviewed the emails provided at my disposal for question 1, page 6 and note Section 30(b)(ii) – applied where disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of views between officials on sensitive matters.

My conclusion after reviewing the information provided is that I agree with the original response that in considering the public interest test, 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 allowing a private space within which officials can provide free and frank advice and views to Ministers when briefing them on sensitive matters.

The redacted material reflects internal discussions and the exchange of views between officials. This content does not represent final or agreed policy positions. Disclosure of these communications would be likely to substantially inhibit the free and frank provision of advice and exchange of views within the Scottish Government. Releasing this material would undermine the ability of officials to explore options openly and assess issues that are still under active consideration. It could also lead to misinterpretation of provisional thinking or prematurely expose deliberations that require a protected space for development. Accordingly, the balance of public interest lies in maintaining the relevant exemptions, to protect the integrity of internal decision-making and ensure the effective conduct of public affairs.

I did however note that section 25 was included as a redaction on this page in the response that you received, but was not included in the letter of 22 August 2025. This information however was provided on page 7 of the response to question 1 which is the Statement from NHS Fife. I have also released the name of the Special Advisor on page 6, which was previously redacted.

At point 2 of your request;

1. All the information that was redacted on page one of the attachment provided in response to question five of my request given the reference number 202500476219 with the exception of section 38 redactions.

I have reviewed the emails provided on question 5, page one and note Section 30(b)(ii) – applied where disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of views between officials on sensitive matters and Out of Scope redactions were redacted on this page.

My conclusion after reviewing the information provided is that we recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government. The exemptions in section 30(b) can only be applied where disclosure would, or would be likely to, cause substantial inhibition. There must be at least a significant probability that substantial inhibition would occur in order for the exemption to be appropriately applied. There must be a genuine link between disclosure and inhibition: it cannot simply be a remote or hypothetical possibility.

On the basis of the above, and following my review, I can conclude that I have provided previously redacted information in this response for Question 5, page 1 marked in green and removed the section 30 (b)(ii) redaction.

At point 3 of your request;

1. Seeking all the information contained in the emails that have been provided on the pages I’ve highlighted, even if they were out of scope for the original request.

I have reviewed the emails provided on question 5, page one which were stated as Out of Scope where some of the information is withheld because it is out of the scope of the current request.

My conclusion after reviewing the information provided to me is that I agree that the redactions of emails that are indeed out of scope of this request. The reason for this is the information that is being withheld is out of the scope of the current request from the questions you have provided.

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 202500482778 - Information released - Annex A

File type

PDF

File size

93.9 kB

FOI 202500482778 - Information released - Annex B

File type

PDF

File size

141.6 kB