To absolutely hate this government, and what they are doing to our country? PART 2

Why do the government refer to the state pension as a benefit then? They HAVE talked about means testing it.

Asked me what? Something you want to know. Go for it I’m not stopping you finding out.

Again, it’s within the U.K. court system not internal. You have that wrong too.

Why is the government bringing them in? What's the rationale behind it?

That's still 19 too many rapes that would not have happened if they were not here.

But most do not have the same culture as us and their opinion of women and girls is horrendous.

The government is definitely bringing them in along with help from the French. There are numerous videos of the French escorting the boats over with recordings of conversations between the French ships and our rescue/taxi service boats. We even send the life jackets and dinghies back to France for re-use.

I asked you first.

And what wrong info have I posted ? Yes I said "internal process", and you corrected me to "First-tier tribunal", and I thanked you for that.

What else is wrong ?

And technically, by the way, this "First-tier tribunal" is still within the ICO, so it is still internal. It's not off to the High Court is it ? We have already established the Tribunal has 2 cases per working day peak. So we can maybe say that is semantics ?

Also, I have no idea if these things are published or not. And with up to 500 cases a year, I would not be surprised if there is a limit to what is published.

As I have said many times. I am happy to be corrected, so correct away.

But they still get a monetary allowance, free clothes, medical and dental care etc. etc.

Have you managed to find what you’re asking for?

You obviously can post the wrong info in quite a few long posts so it must be available to you.

Are you using AI for that ?

Fair enough if you are. I just think it is better to say if you are. Because it does make a lot of mistakes.

But ok. They are at First-tier tribunal. Did you manage to find the text that is in the Government appeal ?

Yes it’s the tribunal not internal review, here you go.

The specific hearing date for the tribunal has not yet been publicly scheduled or announced.
The overall legal timeline for the case is currently moving through the following stages:

• 17 July 2026: The official commencement date of the appeal process, which is when the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) formally lodged its challenge against the ICO ruling at the First-tier Tribunal. about:blank 1, 2]
• August 2026: The MoJ's initial 28-day extension to outline and submit its detailed legal arguments concluded.

We’ll see if anyone else can admit they took your posts even though they were incorrect, for some reason.

btw not sure what your last para is referring to, I was thinking of the usual interjections from posters.

Thank you for the correction. So they are at first tier tribunal and not at internal review ?

Quote from your post.

• The First-tier Tribunal (~300–500 per year): If either the requester or the public authority disagrees with the final Decision Notice issued by the ICO, they have 28 days to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)

300-500 per year. So it is not exactly a rare occurrence. 250 days per working year, so that is about 2 per day at peak. That is a lot of potential "covering up"

Anyway, does that mean that all of what I posted is wrong?

Also, do you have a link that says what stage of the process this is at ? Just as a matter of interest.

Quote " You have the usual back up as clockwork "

Just the old noggin grinding away. I used to do a fair bit on online debates with flat earthers a few years back. I think that is a good way to learn logic and debate styles, how to avoid using logical fallacies and all that.

Patronising? There's a few who are very familiar with that tactic.

Yes it’s strange that anyone is taking that misinformation at face value, but thanks for reading which some won’t do.

Hopefully that’s it as it’s so clear.

And still it persists. Even on mumsnet.

You have the usual back up as clockwork ; but no you’re mixing up two systems.

Firstly if they don’t publish it is contempt of court and can be escalated.

Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), an Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) Decision Notice is legally binding. If the government loses its appeal at the First-tier Tribunal and continues to withhold the data, the ICO can certify the government's non-compliance to the High Court. The High Court can then treat the refusal as contempt of court, which carries severe reprimands and potential financial penalties

That’s unlikely. If Labour lose they will publish instead.

You’re also missing that tribunal stage is very low per year.

The FOI Escalation Funnel
To see why the number is so low, it helps to understand the massive filtering process that happens before a case can ever reach a judge: about:blank 1]

• The Initial Requests (~500,000+ per year): Central government monitored bodies alone receive over 94,000 FOI requests annually. When you factor in all 100,000+ public authorities nationwide (including local councils, NHS trusts, schools, and police forces), the total is close to half a million. about:blank 1, 2]
• Internal Reviews (~4,700 per year): If a request is fully or partially withheld, the user can demand an internal review by the public authority. Only about 14% of refused requesters take this step.about:blank 1]
• ICO Complaints (~7,000 to 10,000 per year): If the internal review fails, the requester can complain to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). The ICO received a record 10,000+ FOI complaints in the 2025/26 financial year. about:blank 1, 2]
• The First-tier Tribunal (~300–500 per year): If either the requester or the public authority disagrees with the final Decision Notice issued by the ICO, they have 28 days to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)

You are mixing up the internal review and tribunal stage.

Weirdly, my work flow in my employment always flows the wrong way around.

Yet again, people misrepresenting information resort to patronising those who provide the evidence to show what is actually happening.

@RedTagAlan thank you for the informative posts.

Yes. I was always very confused by her references to "the post below" until I realised.

You are doing great work RedTagAlan but certain posters really don't like their agenda being challenged.

I think Eastern has configured her settings so the thread appears the opposite way to most of the rest of us. It would confuse the hell out of me.

What post below ? As a matter of interest, does your device scroll from bottom to top with post order ?

Anyway. " Internal process" is just a term I used. Yes the ICO has enforcement power, and the power of a court to act on that, but it is not a court where you will find yourself if caught speeding.

Semantics I know, and if you don't like the term "internal process" then feel free to use your own.

So why is your conclusion to believe it’s an internal process and not part of the U.K. court system?

The post below cites internal review not understanding its MoJ v ICO at a tribunal which has the power of contempt of court.

I am capable of reading both your information and that of @RedTagAlan and coming to my own conclusions, thank you. As is anyone else reading the thread. Simply repeating yourself and using silly emoji to sneer at people isn't persuasive or engaging.

On FOI requests. Here is some interesting data.

Freedom of Information statistics: annual 2025 bulletin_V2 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

From that -

Key statistics

• In 2025 there were 94,526 FOI requests received across all monitored bodies*. This is an increase of 11,485 (+14%) from 2024 and represents the largest number of requests during a year since monitoring began in 2005 (see Statistical Note at Section 3 regarding the increases at The National Archives).
• Across all monitored bodies, 87% of requests were responded to in time, up from 76% in 2024.
• Of the 94,526 FOI requests received, 62,515 were resolvable. Of these, 36% were granted in full, up from 29% in 2024 and 35% were withheld in full, up from 30% in 2024. The remaining resolvable requests were not yet processed (8%) or were partially withheld (21%).
• Of the 34,807 requests withheld in full or in part, 26.6% were withheld due to the cost of response exceeding the limit, 2.7% were withheld as vexatious or repeated, and the remaining 70.7% fell under other exemptions.

That is a lot of requests, and there is this -

6.1 Internal reviews
Internal reviews
Requesters are able to ask a public authority for an Internal Review if they are not content with the public authority’s initial decision on whether or not to release requested information, if their request was not dealt with within 20 working days or if they felt a fee was wrongly charged.

• An internal review was initiated for 4,720 (14%) of the 34,807 requests where information was initially withheld in 2025.
• Of these, the decision was overturned fully or partially in 1,054 cases (28% of those with a known outcome, up from 27% in 2024).
• Of reviews with a known outcome, 43% were completed within 20 days, down from 47% in 2024

See this bit from that.

• An internal review was initiated for 4,720 (14%) of the 34,807 requests where information was initially withheld in 2025.
• Of these, the decision was overturned fully or partially in 1,054 cases (28% of those with a known outcome, up from 27% in 2024).

So there was 4720 reviews last year, and 1054 cases where it was overturned,

Are we just not beyond that point now. They done their review, and the guv are appealing that review ?

That is a hell of a lot of work going on with FOI requests. Is every one refused a cover up being directed from the top ? Sorry for the "begging the question" there, but going by the numbers above, this all does seem to be routine, and not exceptional.

One thing can be deduced from the above data though. This is all standard stuff that is government funded anyway. So it is not costing XXX amount of extra money. This is what they do day after day.