Filming, Tweeting and Blogging at Cabinet Meetings

The Dept of Local Government has released new guidance on peoples ‘rights’ on using social media and filming equipment at executive meetings (Cabinet). This follows on from a blog post from September 2012.

The new guidance can be found HERE. One of the main points are:

The rules require councils to provide reasonable facilities for any member of the public to report on meetings. Councils should thus allow the filming of councillors and officers at meetings that are open to the public. The Data Protection Act does not prohibit such overt filming of public meetings. Councils may reasonably ask for the filming to be undertaken in such a way that it is not disruptive or distracting to the good order and conduct of the meeting. As a courtesy, attendees should be informed at the start of the meeting that it is being filmed; we recommend that those wanting to film liaise with council staff before the start of the meeting.

The new guidance also talks how much public notice must be given if a meeting (Cabinet) is held in private. The guidance says:

Prior to holding a private meeting, your council must have published on its website and at its offices at least 28 clear days notice of its intention to consider a matter in private and the reasons for the private meeting. This is to ensure that members of the public have reasonable opportunity to make representations as to why the proposed private meeting should not be held in private.

At least five clear days before the meeting, your council must confirm its intention to go ahead with the private meeting through another notice on its website and at its offices. This second notice has to include details of any representations received and the council’s response to them.

As for how the 28 days notice will impact on how Cornwall Council carries out its business, I have asked the councils legal department to look into to make sure we are fully compliant. It should be noted, Cornwall Council already has a policy on filiming – which is good – but it might need to be updated due to these new guidelines.

On the whole I fully welcome these ‘new’ guidelines, which will hope make all councils more open and transparent in its day to day business.

Cornwall Council’s FOI Request Answered

Cornwall Council have very nicely listed on its website many, if not all of the FOI requests received this year. It is great the council has done this, as hopefully by reading some (or all if you like) it might save time and money in people not asking the same questions over  and over again.

So if you want to know how many cats Cornwall Fire and Rescue Service has rescued you can. Or how many Chauffeurs employs/uses; the number of mobile phones and the cost (I am not provided with one before anyone asks). Also listed is the CEO’s pay; how many Councillors are Freemasons and a whole host other information people might be interested in.

Before you get too excited, there is nothing earth-shattering listed, but does make interesting reading and the full list is HERE. It even lists how many FOI requests have not been answered within the required 20 days. So feel free over your coffee, or lunch break to have a look. Who knows, you might find the question you were about to submit might have already been answered, and that will save the council £150 (average cost of a FOI).

Transparency and the Freedom of Information Act

I was kindly sent a document is called ‘Town Hall Transparency’ by @DEdward5 on Twitter. This document is on the impact of freedom of information (FOI) on national and local government in England. It has been written by UCL’s Department of Political Science and has just been published. I would like to congratulate the document writers for a well written paper.

The whole document can be viewed HERE.

For Cornwall Council, it has had its fair share of FOI requests from various professional media bodies, businesses and the public. The council even gets a mention in this report. It is not uncommon for people to asked for the number of FOI and the subjects of  a FOI by means of a FOI.

Maybe the reason why FOI’s are now more commonly used is because any information requested has to be dealt with in a defined time, or as highlighted in the report, people are more aware of how a FOI works. It also makes sure that any information requested has less chance of being misplaced, and therefore forgotten about.

There is a costs for every FOI dealt with, and this for Cornwall Council is £150. Cornwall Council has over the last few years received the following numbers of FOI:

  • 2009/10 – 1100
  • 2010/11 – 1300
  • 2011/March 12 – 1600 (projected)
It is when you add up the numbers of FOI you get the cost of near £435,000. That is a huge amount of money in any one’s book. In fact FOI requests to local authorities (LA) and central government have been rising steadily since the introduction of the legislation. 
In 2005 there were 60,000 requests to LA’s and 25,000 to the government. By 2009 this had risen to 165,000 for LA’s, and 40,000 for the government. Using the £150 per FOI this totals £74,250,000 over four years. 
You might think the press are to blame for the massive increase in numbers of FOI’s, but they are not. As in the report it clearly states:  Some authorities have had a great deal of interest from the local press and some virtually none. It does not appear to have had an impact on FOI request numbers. Yes, the press do submit many of the FOI’s, but not one can point the finger and say it’s your fault.
The four main areas of requests and requesters are:
  • There is heavy use of FOI by a wide range of businesses at local level 
  •  Rising request levels appear to be driven by increased awareness of FOI and media stories in the national press (especially MPs’ expenses) but also local stories. Requests can also come in waves around a particular issue
  • Requests from the public are often niche and of private interest to the person, which makes proactive disclosure ineffective as a means of reducing the number of FOI requests. 
  • Finally, high profile cases aside, FOI rarely obtains a ‘smoking gun’ and requests are often used as part of a wider information gathering campaign, like a jigsaw, or as a lever to obtain influence in a campaign.

    The former Prime Minister Tony Blair who’s party introduced the FOI is quoted as saying: The truth is that the FOI Act isn’t used, for the most part, by ‘the people’. It’s used by journalists. For political leaders, it’s like saying to someone who is hitting you over the head with a stick, ‘Hey, try this instead’, and handing them a mallet (Blair 2010). He may have a point, but then maybe his government should have thought it through a little better before it was introduced.

    I am a firm believer that FOI if used right are good, especially when a LA, or the government is being ‘difficult’ in supplying information. However, FOI asking how many Jedi Knights, or other niche enquiries a LA has is a complete waste of money, and time.
    Of course with any FOI there is a chance it maybe used against the government department, or LA, but this goes with the territory, especially if the wrong, or not fully correct information is sent out. We all know how Cornwall Council has fallen foul of this mistake once or twice. 
    At the end of the day if a FOI request is in the public interest it will be find it’s way into the various media outlets. It is how you handed the story once it breaks is the key. Throwing toys out of the pram by saying the council’s being seen in a bad light because of the media is pure fiction. In fact, the press and a council work well together in many areas.

    The press and both local and national government have different roles, but Freedom of the press, democracy and the right to free speech are principles that all hold dear and each has to play its part to uphold those principles.