#DontSubmitToStonewall - suggested quick action by Legal Feminist

FYI - every oxbridge college is a FOI authority in its own right. I can’t submit requests myself, but if anyone else fancies it...

Can someone who's on Twitter, please, please ask the University of Bedfordshire about this blatant lie to FOI!

You couldn't make it up!!

That's brilliant. I'm guessing that FOI needs to return with some further questions....

Just in case it wasn't clear!

Um???

Excellent titchy BrizzleGirl

I shall look forward to the reply to that!

Right across the NHS. It must be a huge expense nationwide.

I found this on twitter. Looks connected to me.

Hmm. Looking through other FOIs to that hospital it seems they also spent £2783 on rainbow lanyards and badges.

Extrapolate that across the NHS, along with the £12661

Anyone know if the company making all these badges and lanyards is connected to stonewall?

@CardinalLolzy

I missed this thread when it was started but have just read this one posted upthread and

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_495#outgoing-1117785

The final response from J. Whitby-Fretwell is superb

But this NHS trust is wrong about what is a valid name. This is from the ICO's own guidance:

A requester named Robert Jones could call themselves ‘Rob Jones’, ‘Bobby Jones’, ‘R Jones’, ‘Bob Jones’ or ‘Mr Jones’. However, they could not just use ‘Robert’, ‘Bob’, ‘Bobby’ or ‘R.J’.

ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1164/recognising-a-request-made-under-the-foia.pdf

So J. Whitby-Fretwell is a valid name.

Some gems here I look forward to reading later.

This shocked me based on the cost alone, and at a time when all available money should have been thrown into funding the Covid response surely?

"Total cost for the whole exercise
and card, the cost of the badges and the including all postage costs was
total cost of postage to all employees £12,661.20 inclusive of VAT"

Was this a staff morale boost tied in with Stonewall membership? £13k might not seem like much but I wondered how many respirators it would buy...admittedly it would break down to much in the way of a pay rise which I imagine would have been more welcome by NHS staff. Can they not say thank you by email?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/costoffproudrainbowssbadges_do?nocache=incoming-1793899

Looking at the responses to the requests, it seems clear that Stonewall has been driving this whole thing.

The feedback form in the last one - haven’t read it all, but it tells the org to remove references to ‘mother’ in the policy. Shocking.

Hehehe I laughed out loud. Not sure why it tickled me.

I missed this thread when it was started but have just read this one posted upthread and

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_495#outgoing-1117785

The final response from J. Whitby-Fretwell is superb

didn't know about the contract clause that the other party be notified about FOIs, Xenia, thank you.

Do FOIs need updated guidance, given the copy and paste responses and responses that misinterpret the law.

On whey Stonewall might be involved in an FOI request a University receives if S has a contract with the University it is common to include a clause that if the University receives a FOI request regarding the other party (Stonewall) here the other party is notified and allowed to be consulted. i have put that into contracts many times. So that if the FOI might result in information that is not allowed by law to be disclosed such as confidential information being disclosed there is time to know about it and if necessary apply to the court to stop it.

However reputational damage is not a ground as far as I remember to stop an FOI request. If that were so an MP who has had a backhander in return for putting a university contract the way of his wife's company could argue no disclosure!

It's extraordinary isn't it. Rattled though.

Yeah transphobes, it's all your fault that the L, B and G are forgotten about, SW are just too busy dealing with the transphobic FOI requests.

[quote Mollyollydolly]This medium article is about the FOI's from a TRA point of view. I do not endorse the opinions in this article obviously, but thought some of you might like to read how 'the other side' see it. It's an archived link not to give them the clicks.
archive.is/jSVsD[/quote]
Because co-ordinated political and legal action to remove women’s sex-based rights, kept carefully under the radar as outlined in the Denton’s document, is all fine and above board.

But a co-ordinated, open attempt by women to gain information on one of the charities that is almost certainly behind part of the aforementioned campaign is a transphobic attack and so unfair!

This medium article is about the FOI's from a TRA point of view. I do not endorse the opinions in this article obviously, but thought some of you might like to read how 'the other side' see it. It's an archived link not to give them the clicks.
archive.is/jSVsD

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/725256/response/1775334/attach/html/3/FOI%20U.Winfield.pdf.html]

This one makes no sense.
Reply: we do not have dealings with Stonewall.
Meanwhile, a stonewall logo at bottom of the letter.