House Workplace’s Response to Gatwick Drone FOI – sUAS Information

Expensive Requester,

Thanks in your e-mail of 23 October 2024, through which you request copies of the emails disclosed within the Freedom of Data Act request FOI2024/04564.

You particularly ask:

In FOIA FOI2024/04564 a small variety of e-mails had been recognized, I’d like copies of these, I realise some redactions could also be crucial. Word the DfT put it into the general public area that the House Secretary authorised using the Evening Fighter jammer (on this FOIA: Gatwick “drone” associated emails – a Freedom of Data request to Division for Transport – WhatDoTheyKnow) in order that doesn’t want
redacting if it’s coated inside this batch.

Your request has been dealt with as a request for info below the Freedom of Data Act 2000.

In relation to your request above, we are able to affirm that the House Workplace holds a number of the info that you’ve got requested, and we’ve got disclosed this beneath. We’ve got redacted sure info as that is exempt from disclosure by advantage of the exemptions listed below Sections 23 (Data provided by, or referring to, our bodies coping with safety issues), 24 (Nationwide Safety), 31 (Legislation Enforcement) 38 (Well being and Security), 40 (Private Data) of the Freedom of Data Act 2000.

In relation to the e-mail “Fwd: 20181220 – House Secretary and Transport Secretary Name:

Gatwick Drone Incident 21/12/2018 07:36”, we’ve got carried out a radical search and we’ve got established that the House Workplace doesn’t maintain the data which you’ve got requested.

In our preliminary response to FOI2024/04564, we recognized the e-mail title, time and date of every e-mail obtained. The search didn’t get better the physique of the e-mail, solely the precise info requested within the Freedom of Data Request. Following your present request FOI: 2024/08785, we performed a radical search of related mailboxes and shared drives however sadly the physique of this explicit e-mail couldn’t be discovered.

Regrettably, due to this fact, we’ve got concluded that this particular info just isn’t held. Data has been withheld below part 40(2) of the FOIA due to the situation at part 40(3A)(a) the place this considerations the non-public knowledge of third events. The House Workplace has obligations below knowledge safety laws and in legislation usually to guard private knowledge. This exempts private knowledge from launch if disclosure would contravene any of the information safety rules in Article 5(1) of the UK Basic Knowledge Safety Regulation and part 34(1) of the Knowledge Safety Act 2018. We imagine launch would breach the primary knowledge safety precept, since it might be illegal and unfair to reveal the data.

Part 40 of the Act is an absolute exemption and never topic to the general public curiosity check.

Within the circumstances of this case, it’s not acceptable to offer any info that was both provided by, or pertains to, one of many safety our bodies listed in part 23(3) of the FOIA.

We’re due to this fact making use of sections 23(1) (info provided by or referring to safety our bodies) to a part of your request. Because the exemption at part 23(1) is an absolute exemption, no proof of hurt or evaluation of the stability of the general public curiosity is required to help its software.

Please discover additional particulars of those exemptions within the Annex to this letter. Refer beneath Annex for supporting particulars:

ANNEX: Exemptions Used
Part 23 Data provided by, or referring to, our bodies coping with safety issues
Part 24 Nationwide Safety
Part 31 Legislation Enforcement
Part 38 Well being and Security
Part 40 Private Data
ANNEX: Public Curiosity Take a look at (PIT)
Sections 24, 31 and 38 of the Act are certified exemptions and require consideration of the general public curiosity check. We’ve got concluded the general public curiosity lies in favour of withholding the data. The arguments we thought of, each for and in opposition to disclosure, are set out within the Annex.

ANNEX: Unique Request
ANNEX: Disclosed Data

If you’re dissatisfied with this response chances are you’ll request an impartial inside evaluation of our dealing with of your request by submitting a criticism inside two months to [email protected], quoting reference 2024/08785.

In the event you ask for an inside evaluation, it might be useful if you happen to may say why you might be dissatisfied with the response.

As a part of any inside evaluation the Division’s dealing with of your info request shall be reassessed by workers who weren’t concerned in offering you with this response. In the event you stay dissatisfied after this inside evaluation, you’ll have a proper of criticism to the Data Commissioner as established by part 50 of the Freedom of Data Act.

Yours sincerely
Freedom of Data
House Workplace

Associated