Communications regarding Special Adviser involvement in the redaction process: FOI release

Information requested

(Previous) Permanent Secretary in advance of his meeting with the Information Commissioner, setting out the investigation that had been undertaken on whether there had been Spad involvement in the redactions process.

1) I request all communications regarding the investigation that has been referenced in the above passage.

2) Who was involved in the running of the investigation? I.e. who was in charge, who helped run the investigation etc.

3) I request all reports, decision-reports, memos and conclusion summaries regarding the above investigation.

Response

In relation to your first request, while our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide the information you have requested because an exemption under section 30(c) (substantial prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) applies to the information you have requested.

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 transparency, particularly in relation to how internal investigations are conducted and how decisions are made. Disclosure could enhance accountability and contribute to public understanding of the process.

However, this is outweighed by the public interest in allowing investigations to be undertaken in a private space. Its disclosure would be likely to inhibit the effective conduct of public affairs by discouraging the provision of candid advice and assessments between senior officials.

For these reasons, we consider that the exemption under section 30(c) should be upheld and the information withheld.

In relation to your second request, Michael Chalmers, Director for Propriety and Ethics, conducted the investigation.

In relation to your third request, while our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide the information you have requested because an exemption under section 30(c) (substantial prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) applies to the information you have requested.

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 transparency, particularly in relation to how internal investigations are conducted and how decisions are made. Disclosure could enhance accountability and contribute to public understanding of the process.

However, this is outweighed by the public interest in allowing investigations to be undertaken in a private space. Its disclosure would be likely to inhibit the effective conduct of public affairs by discouraging the provision of candid advice and assessments between senior officials.

For these reasons, we consider that the exemption under section 30(c) should be upheld and the information withheld.

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.