Powys council misses information request deadlines
At a meeting of Powys County Council's Liberal Democrat/Labour Cabinet senior councillors received a historic annual report on Information Governance covering 2023/2024.
The report showed that during that year the council received a total of 1,271 information requests under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) and Subject Access Requests (SAR), 16 per cent up on the 1,093 received in 2022/2023.
FOI and EIR requests are supposed to receive an answer within 20 working days while for SAR the deadline is 30 days.
The performance during 2023/2024 saw was 73 per cent for FOI, 77 per cent for EIR and for SARs only 32 per cent were completed on time.
This is down on the 84 per cent for both FOI and EIRs and 57 per cent for SARs that the council achieved in 2022/2023.
The Information Commissioner expects the compliance rate to be at 90 per cent.
The report explains that the team have had staffing issues during the reporting period.
Cllr Raiff Devlin (Liberal Democrat) who was installed as the cabinet member customers, digital and customer services only last month said that an 'Information Management, Assurance, and Governance plan' was in place to try and improve things.
As of the end of March last year only 35 per cent of this plan had been completed.
Cllr Devlin said: 'Further work is required to meet the targets.
'Compliance rates have seen a decline, and this is as a result of resource challenges within the department.
'66 per cent of non-compliant responses were due to delays in the provision of information by the service enabling a response to be drafted or released.
'Complaints to the commissioner are mainly linked to late requests.'
'The commissioner made decisions on two complaints, over an exemption applied and information held.
'The commissioner found in favour of the council on both occasions.'
He said that the report provided 'reasonable assurance' that the council's arrangements and plan 'adequately' reflect the principles of good information governance.
Cllr Devlin added: 'It is important to note that this report is from 2023/2024 and many of the forward plan priorities have already been actioned by the department and that the 2024/2025 report is in development.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
11 hours ago
- Telegraph
America is right to attack Starmer's record on human rights
Aren't human rights wonderful? I'm sure many of our readers will recall the dark days before the passing of the Human Rights Act: child-snatchers prowling the evening streets to deny parents the right to a family life, gruesome thugs free to torture any citizen who might try and engage in a free election. 1997 really was awful. It's easy to mock our unfortunate new state religion, but even the most hardened human-rights sceptic will be heartened to read the US State Department's annual report into human rights in Britain. America apparently takes a different view on domestic affairs than the likes of Lord Hermer, warning that in 2024 'The human rights situation worsened in the United Kingdom' and that there are now 'significant… issues'. The issues in question relate to our handling of free speech, particularly the 'enforcement of or threat of criminal or civil laws in order to limit expression' in the aftermath of the Southport riots. The State Department seems aggrieved that the British Government called on US tech firms to 'censor speech deemed misinformation or 'hate speech'', echoing the dismay of figures within the administration over the treatment of Lucy Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after posting (and then deleting) a message judged to be racial incitement. It's hard to dispute the measured criticism of our free expression issues, nor the suggestion of backsliding after the creation of censorship powers under the Online Safety Act. But what makes this report so remarkable is how similar it is in form – if not character – to those expected of authoritarian rogue states like Belarus. After each example of free-speech violations, we are reminded of the condemnation of 'media freedom NGOs', as if our Government can no longer be trusted by our closest ally to maintain an independently liberal state. It is meddling of the highest order, but meddling is what the US State Department is designed to do. It has since the end of the Second World War sought to influence the domestic affairs of foreign nations, a position garnering endless criticism from the isolationist wing of the Republican Party who perceived it as a needlessly antagonistic mode of diplomatic relations. The criticism isn't just domestic: countries as diverse as South Korea, El Salvador and Poland have voiced their irritation at attempts to steer their domestic politics towards America's sola fide conception of human rights, which apparently had something to do with flying BLM flags outside consulates and not complaining about American-funded NGOs. This state of affairs generally suited the United Kingdom. After all, our Foreign Office is rather skilled in its own art of heavy-handed moralising, with the notion that it ought to promote the global framework of '#BeKind' over British interests. We thought we'd never find ourselves on the receiving end of a patronising communique. Weren't we a sensible country? But the re-election of Donald Trump changed the State Department — and every other federal department under the president's control — beyond recognition. Staff budgets have been slashed, LGBTQI+ flags have been pulled down, and relations with foreign allies reevaluated. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, has made clear that the agency will serve only in the interests of the American people. We're lucky, then, that the American people seem to be so concerned with our — and Europe's — creeping descent into illiberalism. Some will struggle to accept being chastised by the US. Doesn't America have its own issues with human rights? Hasn't it persecuted non-citizens over comments made on the Israel-Gaza conflict, knowing they are not covered by First Amendment protections? These objections have some merit, but are unlikely to influence those within the department. Issues of historic corruption in Ukraine didn't mean we withheld military support after Putin's invasion. No nation is pure: we'd suffer if well-founded and constructive criticism of allies was always considered off-limits. There's a much more coherent rebuttal to be made of the State Department's report, and it concerns its methodology. If human rights only seem to be 'things the people in charge think are good' rather than a coherent moral framework for governance, perhaps they should be jettisoned altogether. I'm sure our Prime Minister, the former human rights barrister, can see the funny side.
The Herald Scotland
13 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Joanna Cherry: 'Shocking' Free Speech threat at Edinburgh Fringe
Asked by Forde whether free speech is under threat in Scotland, Ms Cherry said: 'I think there are…threats to freedom of speech in Scotland and, regrettably, they have come not wholly from my political party. The Greens are certainly enthusiastically on board, the Lib Dems as well, and some people in the Labour party.' She placed part of the blame on former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, adding that the current First Minister 'does not have the courage to speak against it.' READ MORE: WATCH: The Herald's Unspun Live takes over the Fringe How Kate Forbes managed to avoid 'good riddance' comments Kate Forbes: I am not a quitter - this is why I'm leaving Holyrood Ms Cherry criticised Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar as 'missing in action' on issues of free speech, while praising Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay as 'pretty good' on the topic. She described Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton as 'absolutely appalling' and said the Greens were 'unspeakable.' 'There is a real problem in our politics in Scotland that has seeped into our public life,' she said. Ms Cherry condemned the National Library of Scotland for censoring a book written by feminists, lesbians, and sex abuse survivors who opposed what she called Sturgeon's 'identity politics.' She accused the librarian and board chairman of bowing to pressure from a small staff group representing an LGBT network, saying: 'I think that's shocking.' She also criticised Summerhall, the venue that hosted The Herald's Unspun Live Fringe show featuring Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes. Last week, the venue apologised for 'the understandable upset' caused by Forbes' appearance and offered a 'designated relaxed space' for artists, promising to implement new inclusion and wellbeing policies. Ms Cherry, who attended the event, described the situation as 'shocking' and said it was symptomatic of a wider problem at the festival: 'It is also shocking that a venue in this city has effectively said that the deputy first minister of the country is not welcome there…and that staff are so coddled that they need to have a safe room provided for them when Kate did come to speak.' Discussing the broader threat to free speech, Ms Cherry concluded: 'There is a real problem here that we are seeing at the festival.'
The National
13 hours ago
- The National
Scottish Government panned for lack of Israel-linked arms firm checks
A Freedom of Information request has revealed that two major arms companies in receipt of Scottish Enterprise grants – Italian arms giant Leonardo and American multinational Raytheon Systems – haven't received a human right due diligence check since October 2019 This funding comes despite both firms continue to supply Israel with weapons amid its genocide in Gaza. In that timeframe, both firms have also been in receipt of Scottish public money – Leonardo received £786,125 in 2023 while Raytheon Systems, which has a factory in Glenrothes, was given £500k in the first half of 2024. Leonardo produces laser targeting systems for Lockheed Martin, which sells the F-35 jets Israel, and Raytheon makes Paveway II guided missiles which are also used by Israel. READ MORE: JD Vance panned for 'lies about Scotland' ahead of luxury Ayrshire holiday The last time a check was performed on French arms firm Thales was July 2021, while Babcock was last checked in March 2022 and Chemring Energetics in December 2021. Bae Systems received a check in February 2024. In response, human rights charity Amnesty International told The National that the 'more we learn' about the checks 'the more concerning it becomes' that Scottish Enterprise and Scottish ministers are defending the process. Scottish Greens co-leader Lorna Slater, meanwhile, said it was 'shocking', adding: 'There is no point in having human rights checks at all if they are never carried out.' In total, Scottish Enterprise has given £8 million to 13 companies involved in weapons manufacturing since 2019. The Scottish Government has repeatedly insisted that no public funding goes towards the manufacturing of munitions specifically but other areas these companies operate in, including research, training and apprenticeships. Scottish Enterprise, meanwhile, has strongly denied its human rights checks are not adequate. However, that has been called into question given that, of the 199 human rights checks between 2021 and 2023, no firm has ever failed. When pressed on the issue in an exclusive interview with The National last weekend, First Minister John Swinney defended the grants. 'We won't support the production of munitions. That's our hard line. And we get criticised for taking that hard line, and I'm very confident that hard line is applied,' he said. The First Minister was then pressed on the argument that any funding – even if ring-fenced by the Scottish Government – will directly help a company's cash flow and could, hypothetically, free up money to be used elsewhere, including in the building of munitions. 'I understand that point. But there are also defence requirements of Scotland. Scotland is part of an island nation. We require, for example, shipbuilding resources to support the maritime defense of the United Kingdom because nobody wants to see us vulnerable to an attack from Russia. I certainly don't want to,' he responded. An Amnesty International spokesperson said: "Amnesty is aware from our own research that payments were made to companies known to supply Israel without a new check being triggered by the unfolding genocide in Gaza. 'Alarmingly, that is the process Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Government attempted to characterise as robust and well aligned to international standards. The recent in-house review of the human rights checks recommended some improvements, but unsurprisingly they don't go far enough. We will be meeting with Scottish Enterprise in the coming weeks to take these concerns forward." Slater, meanwhile, said it 'flies in the face of any kind of due diligence'. "These are some of the biggest arms companies in the world. They have armed human rights abusers and dictatorships and some have directly enabled and profited from the genocide in Gaza,' she said. "They should not be receiving public money in the first place, and the Scottish Government absolutely should not be setting up tests to win favourable headlines while refusing to actually implement them. "How can we trust a word they say on ensuring they are applying human rights standards when they are refusing to even ask the right questions of those they are giving public money to?" Scottish Enterprise has been approached for comment.
