Swinney accused of holding back release of FOI material
● Opponents call for investigation as emails indicate interference
Opposition politicians last night called for John Swinney to be investigated over emails revealing he wanted to withhold Scottish Government material relating to Prince Charles.
Lib Dem MSP Tavish Scott has written to Scotland’s Information Commissioner demanding an inquiry into the emails, which included correspondence saying that the Deputy First Minister was against releasing information requested under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws.
The chain of emails, published yesterday, also appeared to show FOI requests being screened by the government’s special advisers.
The involvement of special advisers, who have a political role in government, led to claims at Holyrood that the government was holding back information in case it proved politically embarrassing.
The row erupted when the lecturer and journalist James Mcenaney released official correspondence he obtained after a seven-month battle with the government.
The emails included one dated 23 June 2017, which suggests that documents scheduled for release were removed following the intervention of Colin Mcallister, a special adviser.
An email sent on 30 June last year from Mr Swinney’s department
indicated that the Deputy First Minister was against releasing information about Prince Charles and his interest in the Teach First education charity.
Last year it emerged that the Prince of Wales had discussions with then First Minister Alex Salmond in 2013 about Teach First, a charity that trains teachers.
The email referred to a FOI request and said: “DFM (Deputy First Minister) is content for this to go but thinks it would be better to see if we could not release the material relating to Prince Charles or his PS [Private Secretary – name redacted]. “He specifically referenced documents 20,24,24,26 as ones he’d prefer were not released.”
Mr Scott said he was writing to the Information Commissioner Daren Fitzhenry seeking an urgent investigation.
“These new documents suggest that special advisers were interfering in the content of replies to freedom of information requests in the very same week that ministers told me and parliament they weren’t,” Mr Scott said.
“If information scheduled for release into the public domain was withheld solely on the basis that a minister would `prefer’ it was not released, it would seriously damage public confidence in their right to information.
“There can be no meddling of this nature.”
The matter was raised with Nicola Sturgeon at First Minister’s Questions by the Labour MSP Rhoda Grant.
Ms Grant said: “The First Minister appears to be aware that her government and their special advisers are holding back material from FOIS that could cause them embarrassment.
“Does she therefore believe that saving their own blushes is more important than transparency, and indeed, the law?”
The Scottish Conservatives said the emails suggested that Scottish Government’s parliament minister Joe Fitzpatrick had misled parliament when he spoke in a debate on FOI last year. When asked whether requests were being screened for potential political damage by special advisers in June, Mr Fitzpatrick responded: “No, requests are all prepared by Scottish Government officials. Special advisers have a role in assessing draft responses for accuracy.”
The Conservative MSP Edward Mountain said: “The evidence suggests that special advisers are routinely involved in the freedom of information process for political purposes and John Swinney himself is suppressing documents when it suits him. Mr Fitzpatrick categorically denied this.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “Freedom of Information requests are prepared by Scottish Government officials who seek comments from relevant parts of the organisation, including special advisers and other officials, and consider whether Ministerial clearance should be sought.
“The legal duty to comply with FOI legislation lies with Scottish Ministers.”
‘You idiot. You naive, foolish, irresponsible nincompoop … I quake at the imbecility of it.” Tony Blair did not hold back when describing his regret at introducing the Freedom of Information Act in 2000. However, Westminster’s Justice Select Committee said it had been a “success” and “enhanced the UK’S democratic system”, while civil rights group Liberty believes it has played “an essential role in holding the state to account”.
So, if the allegations that Deputy First Minister John Swinney attempted to withhold information for political reasons and SNP special advisers screened responses for anything that might be embarrassing are true, this is nothing less than an attack on modern democracy itself. It could also, potentially, be illegal. The Scottish Information Commissioner, Daren Fitzhenry, appears to mean business, publishing a letter to Parliamentary Business Minister Joe Fitzpatrick in which he set out how he plans to assess “serious concerns” about the Scottish Government’s FOI system.
He said he would look into whether the “internal request handling procedures (particularly those that concern which officials should respond to, or advise on, requests) [were] consistent with FOI law” and whether there was “evidence of a practice of requests being blocked or refused for tenuous reasons”. Mr Fitzhenry plans to send two members of his staff to work alongside the Scottish Government’s FOI team and he “may also wish to interview staff and officeholders involved in the FOI process”.
Unsurprisingly, the Scottish Government can expect this to be a fairly open investigation – or “intervention under my enforcement policy” as the Commissioner described it. He told Mr Fitzpatrick that there was a “strong public interest in providing as much information … as possible” about his progress.
Ministers’ defence of their actions at the moment relies on the idea that the legal duty to comply with the law lies with Scottish Ministers. If they are accountable it is “entirely appropriate for them to decide whether they are content with proposed information releases and exemptions applied in line with the FOI Act”, the Scottish Government said. While this principle seems sounds, it is the practice of it that is now coming under scrutiny. If FOI responses have not been truthful or have been drawn up with the use of spin doctors’ tricks to obscure the truth, this could get very serious.