Correspondence between Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and Cabinet Secretary for Housing that mentions "Path To Balance": FOI Review

Information requested

Original request: 202500494290

All correspondence between Shona Robison and her office, and Cabinet Secretary Mairi McAllan and her office that mentions Path To Balance or is related to Path To Balance.  

Can I also have sight of all correspondence between the Cabinet Secretary and the Director General for housing that mentions Path To Balance.

Response

Further to my letter of 21 January 2026, I have now completed my review of our response to your request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA) for:

Initial request:

• All correspondence between Shona Robison and her office, and Cabinet Secretary Mairi McAllan and her office that mentions Path To Balance or is related to Path To Balance.
• Can I also have sight of all correspondence between the Cabinet Secretary and the Director for Housing that mentions Path To Balance.

Request for review:

• In your response, you say that the letters between relevant parties cannot be released because it would inhibit substantially the free and frank exchange of advice for the purposes of deliberation. However, the cabinet secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture released his correspondence, albeit with some redactions.
• It cannot be that this exemption only applies to certain ministers. If Angus Robertson does not believe the request would stymie the free and frank exchange of views and is able to release relevant information then your refusal to also do so does not meet the test.
• I would add that I made the same request last year for the same information - although the wording was "spending controls" rather than "path to balance" - and the correspondence was released without issue, albeit again with some redactions. If the public interest test to release the information was met last year, it is met this year.

Response:

I have concluded that the original decision should be confirmed, with modifications.

I have reconsidered the exemptions applied, reviewing all the information on a line by line basis. The exemptions applied were under s29(1)(b) (Ministerial communications), s.30(b)(i) (free and frank exchange of advice), s,30(b)(ii) exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation.

Having considered, I am withdrawing reliance on the exemption at s.30(b)(ii) as applied incorrectly and should be recorded as only as s.30(b)(i) (free and frank exchange of advice)

A further exemption should also be applied under s38(1)(b) (personal information) to some of the information requested.

Information which should now be released can now be found at Annex A attached.

Section 29(1)(b) – Ministerial communications

An exemption under section 29(1)(b) of FOISA (Ministerial communications) applies to some of the information requested because it relates to communications between Scottish Ministers.

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 a private space within which policy positions can be explored and refined, until the Government as a whole can reach a decision that is sound and likely to be effective. This private thinking space also allows for all options to be properly considered, so that good policy decisions can be taken.

Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process.

Section 30(b)(i) – free and frank provision of advice

An exemption under section 30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to Ministers before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice on the Path to Balance will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future.

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 a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to Ministers, as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government’s position on the Path to Balance, until the Government as a whole can adopt a decision that is sound and likely to be effective. This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that good policy decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers and officials, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 38(1)(b) – applicant has asked for personal data of a third party

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, ie names/contact details of individuals, 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.

In your review request you ask why certain correspondence has been released from a separate FOI request relating to the Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture but not in this instance. You also note that similar information has been released previously.

FOI responses and reviews are undertaken independently by Scottish Government civil servants and are considered on their own merits based on the specific wording of the request and on the particular information that is covered by the request. While information of a similar nature may have been disclosed in a previous FOI request we must consider every request on its own merits and in light of the circumstances around that request

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 202600500945 - Information released - Annex A

File type

PDF

File size

211.4 kB