Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 dated 20 th June 2016.

Transcription

1 From: FOI Sent: 12 July :41 To: Subject: FOI 89/16 - Advice regarding spending allegations Dear Our Ref: FOI 89/16 Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 dated 20 th June The Commission aims to respond to requests for information promptly and has done so within the statutory timeframe of twenty working days. Your request is in bold below followed by our response. You have requested: What advice was asked for from the Electoral Commission into the allegations surrounding the spending during the 2015 General Election campaign by: a) Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding Labour party spending b) Greater Manchester Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Mike Kane, the MP for Wythenshawe and Sale East c) West Merseyside Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Margaret Greenwood, the MP for Wirral West d) West Yorkshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Judith Cummins, the MP for Bradford South e) Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Joan Ryan, the MP for Enfield f) South Wales Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Jo Stevens, the MP for Cardiff Central g) Nottinghamshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Gloria De Piero, the MP for Ashfield h) Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Clive Efford, the MP for Eltham i) Norfolk Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South j) West Yorkshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Naz Shah, the suspended MP for Bradford West k) Kent Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Nigel Farage, the candidate for South Thanet l) Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Tulip Siddiq, the MP for Hampstead and Kilburn m) Somerset and Avon Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Tessa Munt, the former MP for Wells n) Cheshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Julia Tickridge, the former MP for Weaver Vale o) Wiltshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Duncan Hames, the former MP for Chippenham 1

2 p) Devon and Cornwall Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Adrian Sanders, the MP for Devon and Cornwall q) Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Sadiq Khan, the former MP for Tooting r) Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Ruth Cadbury, the MP for Brentford and Isleworth s) Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Rupa Huq, the MP for Ealing Central and Acton Our response is as follows: The Commission has no powers to investigate or sanction potential offences in relation to candidate spending under the Representation of the People Act 1983 (RPA). Potential offences under RPA are a matter for the police. The Commission does routinely provide advice to the police, when requested, regarding election law, including the RPA. The decision as to what action, if any, to take is for the police. It is important to be clear that: a) such requests for advice are often made at the point the police receive an allegation. Therefore a request for, or the provision of, advice does not indicate or imply that a matter is being investigated by the police; and b) your reference to the allegations in each instance implies that allegations have been made, but this response should not be taken as indicating that the Commission is necessarily aware of any such allegations except where we acknowledge having provided advice. The Commission does hold information relevant to your request regarding: West Yorkshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Naz Shah, the suspended MP for Bradford West Somerset and Avon Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Tessa Munt, the former MP for Wells Cheshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Julia Tickridge, the former MP for Weaver Vale Devon and Cornwall Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Adrian Sanders, the MP for Devon and Cornwall The Commission does not hold information relevant to your request regarding: Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding Labour party spending Greater Manchester Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Mike Kane, the MP for Wythenshawe and Sale East West Merseyside Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Margaret Greenwood, the MP for Wirral West West Yorkshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Judith Cummins, the MP for Bradford South Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Joan Ryan, the MP for Enfield South Wales Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Jo Stevens, the MP for Cardiff Central 2

3 Nottinghamshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Gloria De Piero, the MP for Ashfield Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Clive Efford, the MP for Eltham Norfolk Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Clive Lewis, the MP for Norwich South Kent Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Nigel Farage, the candidate for South Thanet Metropolitan Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Tulip Siddiq, the MP for Hampstead and Kilburn Wiltshire Police into the allegations surrounding the spending of Duncan Hames, the former MP for Chippenham Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Sadiq Khan, the former MP for Tooting Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Ruth Cadbury, the MP for Brentford and Isleworth Metropolitan Police the allegations surrounding the spending of Rupa Huq, the MP for Ealing Central and Acton With regard to the information the Commission holds, all such requests for advice by the police, and advice provided, are for the purposes of ascertaining whether a person should be charged with an offence, or whether any person has failed to comply with the law. For the reasons set out below, the Commission considers the requested correspondence exempt from disclosure under sections 31 and 40 of the FOI Act, and we are withholding this information from release. Section 31 (1) (g) Section 31 (1) (g) exempts from disclosure information that would or would be likely to prejudice the exercise of both the police s and the Commission s functions under PPERA for the purposes of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law, as provided by s31 (2)(a) of the FOI Act. The Commission considers that disclosure of the information you have requested would hinder the Commission s ability to share information with other law enforcement bodies, thus limiting the Commission s ability to co-operate with those bodies and effectively enforce the law. The Commission has advised West Yorkshire Police, Somerset and Avon Police, Cheshire Police, and Devon and Cornwall Police of this request, and all four have advised that disclosure of the information you have requested would hinder their ability to share information with the Commission, thus limiting their ability to co-operate with the Commission and effectively enforce the law. Application of the section 31 exemption is subject to the public interest test. There are a number of factors that must be considered and weighed in the balance. These factors are that: The public interest lies in enabling the Commission to work with other law enforcement bodies and share information, on a confidential basis. It is in the public interest to maintain this confidentiality, as it encourages the free and frank exchange of information from other law enforcement bodies to the Commission without which the Commission could not perform its statutory functions. Co-operation with other enforcement agencies in general is essential to our ability to conduct our statutory functions, and particularly where there is the possibility of breaches of the 3

4 Representation of the People Act Free exchange of information between the Commission and the police and CPS, in confidence, is essential to the successful enforcement of the regime. Having carefully weighed the public interest relating to possible disclosure of the information requested under Section 31 (1) (g), we are satisfied that it is not appropriate at this time to disclose the information which the Commission holds. The Commission is satisfied that maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Section 40(2) In withholding the information from disclosure, the Commission relies on the exemptions section 31(1)(g). It should also be noted that some of this information also falls within section 40(2). If this information were not already subject to section 31(1)(g), the Commission would apply section 40(2) considering the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) principles of fairness in relation to personal data. Section 40 (2) provides for an exemption where the information requested constitutes personal data as defined by the DPA, and where release of the information requested would breach one of the data protection principles. Some of the information we hold that is relevant to your request falls within the description of personal data as defined by section 1 of the DPA because the information relates directly to an identifiable living individual, and is personal data under section 40 (2). Disclosure of this information would contravene the first principle of the DPA. The first data protection principle states that personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully. The Commission considers that it would be unfair to release the information requested as it would be reasonably expected by those individuals that details of who they are, the positions they hold or held, any home addresses and similar personal data would not be disclosed to the general public including in connection with these matters. In addition, some of the personal data will be sensitive personal data in view of the fact that it has been sought or provided in relation to potential criminal offences. Therefore, in addition with the section 31(1)(g) exemption as mentioned above, the Commission is not satisfied that under section 40 (2) it would be fair and lawful to provide you with the personal data contained in the information requested. I realise that you may be disappointed by this response. The Commission strives to be an open, transparent authority, but in some circumstances we cannot responsibly release requested information, and we ask for your understanding in this regard. I trust that this information satisfies your request. The Commission strives to be an open, transparent authority, but in some circumstances we cannot responsibly release requested information, and we ask for your understanding in this regard. If you are not satisfied with this response, please note that the Commission operates a review procedure, details of which can be found on the Commission website at: Please also note that if you have exhausted all internal Commission review procedures and you are still not satisfied you have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner. Details of this procedure can be found on the ICO website: Yours sincerely 4

5 Paul O Malley Information Adviser (Records Management) The Electoral Commission 3 Bunhill Row London EC1Y 8YZ Tel: Fax: Putting voters first Please consider the environment before printing this . 5