Copy of review by Royal College of Radiologists (FOI)

Internal Review Request

I would like to appeal this decision on two counts. 

Firstly, public interest: there is a strong public interest in disclosing issues within the radiology department as it is one of critical importance for island women. Also, this report has been in the possession of the Health department since the end of January 2024 - why wait another 12 weeks?

Secondly, as I understand it the Health Advisory Board meet monthly - why can the report not be given to the board during the June meeting? 

Internal Review Response

The Information Governance Manager was asked to undertake the Internal Review. They had not been involved in composing the original response or in the original decision to apply Article 36 (Information intended for future publication). 

The Internal Review was coordinated and administered by the Health and Community Services (HCS) Freedom of Information (FOI) Officer. The in-scope FOI response and the Internal Review Procedure were shared at the review meeting.

The Information Governance Manager was asked to consider whether:

• the Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 has been properly applied and whether the information requested genuinely falls within the exemption(s) cited 
• there were any other options available in order to respond to the request
• it is possible to provide you with any further information, and 

They will also provide an outcome of the internal review by stating whether:

• the original decision is upheld, or 
  
• the original decision is reversed in part or in full, or 
• the original decision is modified

Has the exemption been properly applied?

The exemption cited was Article 36: Information intended for future publication - Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011, which states:

(3) Information is qualified exempt information if, at the time when the request for the

information is made, the information is being held by a public authority with a view to its being published within 12 weeks of the date of the request.

(4) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground

must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant –

(a) of the date when the information will be published;

(b) of the manner in which it will be published; and

(c) by whom it will be published.

(3) In this Article, “published” means published –

(a) by a public authority; or

(b) by any other person.

As the report sought was due for publication within 12 weeks of the date of the FOI request, Article 36 (1) is relevant in this case. Article 36 is a qualified exemption, and as such, a prejudice test was carried out when considering the application of this exemption to the original request, as required by law.

Having reviewed the definitions as stated in the relevant legislation, and the public interest test justification, it was agreed that the application of Article 36: Information intended for future publication was appropriate in this case, in consideration of the scheduled publication date, the processes requiring completion ahead of such information being entered into the public domain, and the additional works required to make this report available through FOI in advance of, and in such close proximity to the expected publication date (when the public benefit of earlier publication under the Law would derive limited benefit).

Were there any other options available? 

Article 12 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 places a duty on Scheduled Public Authorities to make reasonable efforts to provide sufficient advice and assistance to applicants. Whilst agreeing that the use of Article 36 was appropriate, we also reviewed whether:

• there were any other options available when responding to this FOI request
• it is in the legitimate interest of the applicant (and subsequently the wider public) to disclose the information requested, irrespective of the imminent publication.

Freedom of Information legislation is designed to further the aim of greater openness and transparency by enabling ready access to public information. 

When responding to requests of this nature, HCS has to balance the public interest with the impact that disclosing this information would, or would be likely to, have upon the organisation and / or third parties.

The FOI response identified that the report would be available on www.gov.je for the next meeting of the HCS Advisory Board, which now convenes bi-monthly, in July 2024. The schedule published on www.gov.je, as referenced in the public interest test, confirmed the next Board meeting as 25 July 2024. Board papers are uploaded ahead of the meeting date, with publication due on 18 July 2024;

Whilst the FOI response noting the imminent publication was issued to the applicant on 5 June 2024, approximately 6 weeks ahead of the publication date, additional time would have been required if preparing reports for release. This would have reduced the time differential between the scheduled publication date and any potential earlier publication through FOI.

It is acknowledged that information on the services provided to islanders are of public interest, and that there is a legitimate interest in understanding where there may be issues identified in service delivery. The issues identified within the Radiology department and mammography service have been disclosed and discussed publicly, and whilst there is also a legitimate interest in viewing the report on the invited review of the Radiology department, this does not outweigh the interest in maintaining the exemption to follow processes requiring completion ahead of such information being entered into the public domain, and the impact of the additional works required to make this report available through FOI in advance of, and in such close proximity to the expected publication date (when the public benefit of earlier publication under the Law would derive limited benefit).

Is it possible to provide you with any further information?

It was agreed that, whilst the application of Article 36 was appropriate, greater detail of the justification for this exemption could have been provided in the public interest test. The following additional information should be noted in favour of the application of Article 36 (information intended for future publication):

In respect of the information being in the public interest; 

• It is acknowledged that information on the services provided to islanders are of public interest. 
• There is a public in​terest in ensuring that any parties affected by issues identified in service provision are informed and invited for further consultation (as required) in advance of such information being shared with the wider public, and providing assurance that such processes are observed. 
• Issues identified within the Radiology department and mammography service have been disclosed and discussed publicly.
• It is appropriate for the report of the invited review of the Radiology department to be published, following appropriate preparatory processes, including those necessitated by legislation.

In respect of the questions posed of the timescale for publication;

• The HCS Advisory Board now convenes bi-monthly. No meeting was scheduled for June 2024. This could have been more clearly communicated in the original response.
• Though Article 36 outlines a timeframe of 12 weeks, the FOI response identified that the report would be available on www.gov.je for the July meeting of the HCS Advisory Board. The meeting schedule published on www.gov.je, as referenced in the public interest test, confirmed the next Board meeting as 25 July 2024. Board papers are uploaded ahead of the meeting date, with publication due on 18 July 2024. Whilst the FOI response noting the imminent publication was issued to the applicant on 05 June 2024, approximately 6 weeks ahead of the publication date, additional time would have been required if preparing reports for release, further reducing this time differential.
• A link could have been provided to the specific webpage where the meeting schedule is published, for reference, as below:

Health and Community Services Advisory Board (gov.je)​

Outcome

It was agreed that HCS appropriately applied a qualified exemption (Article 36: Information intended for future publication), in consideration of the public interest in publishing the requested information ahead of schedule weighed against the interests in maintaining the exemption (as detailed above) where publishing in advance, and in such close proximity to the intended publication date would derive limited public benefit. Therefore, the original decision is upheld.