NHS Business Services Authority declines to answer FOI

[highame]

www.spectator.co.uk/article/nhs-agency-stonewalls-on-charity-links Thanks to Steerpike

This article in the specie is well worth a read and shows just how pervasive the culture of hiding information has become. I am assuming that Stonewall may have advised on this response and it may be that NHS Business Services Authority hasn't caught up with what's going on. Best they catch up quickly, before someone decides court action would be a good idea

The response from NHSBSA is incredible, point 4 in their refusal is interesting to say the least.

We pay for this shower don't we? Wouldn't it be nice if the government let us on FWR chose where women's taxes went, just for one year

Reading with intrigue

Oooh! So they have chosen to overlook, overturn, get ahead of the law in their reasons to refuse!?

How interesting.

I'm going to email my MP to say I think a full inquiry into Stonewall and it's DCS is required. It won't make a difference but their response new will be interesting.

On a side note, I wish the Spectator would stop referring to Stonewall as a gay rights charity, it isn't and hasn't been for sometime and at this point I don't think they ever gave a shit about trans rights but saw it as an opportunity to keep the gravy train going.

Diversity and Inclusion "senior leaders" actively promote the fact that they "worked to achieve Stonewall Top 100 status" on their CVs and linked in profiles, moving from one public body to the next. They're really proud of it. I imagine when the FOIAs come in the conversations get interesting. Perhaps in this case it came down to a powerplay between the D&I manager and FOI officer.

whilst we have clearly stated our reasons for refusal, if the recipient has any concerns about our handling of the request our response includes information on how to contact us to request a review.' Does this suggest that they know they're on shaky ground.

Personally, I'm livid. I am so sick of public bodies and stonewall thinking they can disregard laws.

Wow! I think the response is even more revealing than simply answering the FOI would have been.

So.... does this need to be forwarded to the ICO?

Has someone done the FOI to see if Stonewall helped them draft that response as per Nancy Kelley’s Tweet?

And if Stonewall are helping to draft these stonewalling responses is that within their remit as a charity or is it something the Charity Commission should know about?

@highame

whilst we have clearly stated our reasons for refusal, if the recipient has any concerns about our handling of the request our response includes information on how to contact us to request a review.' Does this suggest that they know they're on shaky ground.

Personally, I'm livid. I am so sick of public bodies and stonewall thinking they can disregard laws.

Having been in the position of answering FOI requests in a past life, that's actually the only bit that looks to me like a standard (i.e. following the template) response! The rest of it I read with a dropped jaw.

@allmywhat

So.... does this need to be forwarded to the ICO?

Has someone done the FOI to see if Stonewall helped them draft that response as per Nancy Kelley’s Tweet?

And if Stonewall are helping to draft these stonewalling responses is that within their remit as a charity or is it something the Charity Commission should know about?

They've asked for an internal review (this has to be done before referring it to ICO).

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_342#outgoing-1162085

Naomi Cunningham has made a further request about any communication between NHSBSA and Stonewall relating to the original request.

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/follow_up_on_your_answer_to_a_st

You’ll be shocked to see they don’t list the protected characteristics correctly

www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/what-we-do/work-us

Presumably they have something massive to hide? Unless of course..... surely not....... they took advice from Stonewall on how to answer the FOI

With Stonewall's emerging reputation for applying fantasy law, surely no government organisation would take advice from them about FOI practice and legislation??

Still bloody fuming........ this just smacks of cronyism and corruption

You’ll be shocked to see they don’t list the protected characteristics correctly

Wow, sex and gender identity including non binary.

Not even a mention of gender reassignment which is why they have 8 instead of 9 protected characteristics.

That is fucking outrageous. Has anybody archived? I really must work out how to.

Organisations are obliged to seek clarification from requesters if they're not sure what is being asked for, not refuse to answer on that basis. I do FOI stuff and that response is just ridiculous.

They can't do that!

Crikey! It certainly sounds like its been written from Stonewall's point of view, rather than from the NHSBA perspective.
Using an FOI request "as a means to damage Stonewall"?

Why don't they just release the information and show that it doesn't damage Stonewall?

The whole tone is very odd.

@highame

whilst we have clearly stated our reasons for refusal, if the recipient has any concerns about our handling of the request our response includes information on how to contact us to request a review.' Does this suggest that they know they're on shaky ground.

Personally, I'm livid. I am so sick of public bodies and stonewall thinking they can disregard laws.

Me too

@GCITC

Wow! I think the response is even more revealing than simply answering the FOI would have been.

Quite, they’re stupid as well as arrogant

Does anyone know how to contact the moderators about a deleted thread? I just tried to start a thread (in this forum) and had it immediately deleted, with a message saying they're looking behind the scenes.

It had a YouTube link, to a Buck Angel video - I'm not sure if that's not allowed, or if it was my wording - I could have made the title less emotive.
I haven't had an email about it, and I'd like to know what I need to change - does anyone know how I can find out? Thank you peeps.

I have also responded to FOI requests in a previous life.

I don't remember using FOAI as a means to damage stonewall as being a reason not to comply with the legislation.

Surely not another SW fantasy rule?

It had a YouTube link, to a Buck Angel video - I'm not sure if that's not allowed

What was the nature of the video? An interview or something else?

They really are convinced that no one can evah get in trouble for shitting on women, totally confident of it.