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

What are they hiding?
Transparency and accountability are nowhere.

@nauticant

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?

It was an interview with a detransitioner.

I saw and saved the link to it @StellaAndCrow - thanks for sharing it.

Maybe report your post made on this thread and ask why it was deleted. I think a reported post sometimes receives a quicker response than an email. Maybe.

I'm glad I caught it before it went. It would be weird for someone to report it, I saw it when it only had your post/the OP.

If it was simply a video of an interview then that seems odd.

For anyone interested, this is the ICO's guidance on refusing an FOI request on grounds of vexatious requests, which appears to be the exemption that has been relied on here:

ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1198/dealing-with-vexatious-requests.pdf

The Information Commissioner recognises that dealing with
unreasonable requests can place a strain on resources and get
in the way of delivering mainstream services or answering
legitimate requests. Furthermore, these requests can also
damage the reputation of the legislation itself.

9. Section 14(1) is designed to protect public authorities by
allowing them to refuse any requests which have the potential
to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of
disruption, irritation or distress.

Seeking to damage the reputation of a charity doesn't seem on the face of it to meet the bar on this one.

Scattergun approach

The request appears to be part of a completely random
approach, lacks any clear focus, or seems to have been solely
designed for the purpose of ‘fishing’ for information without
any idea of what might be revealed.

Again, this is the quoted exemption but doesn't seem to hold up against the substance of the request, which is for specific information.

I'd be surprised if this one didn't fall at the internal review stage, let alone the ICO.

Multiple bolding failures there.

Thanks very much Nauticant and HolyJesus - I'd put a link to a video of Buck Angel interviewing an 18 year old MtF transitioned - I'd added some quotes from the video. I did as you suggested and reported my post on this thread to ask - they replied saying they took it down to check the quotes from the video, and they were fine so they've reinstated it (though I can't see it now).
This is the video if anyone's interested - it's really worth watching; I found it gutting, just so sad and angry-making.

It sounds like the NHS FOI responder person emailed Stonewall for help, Stonewall emailed them back a huffy petulant rant, and the FOI responder person accidentally copied and paste the Stonewall sulk into the reply.

I hope there is an email discussion rather than it having been more prudently done over the phone since that discussion could also be subject to an FOI.

@PearPickingPorky

It sounds like the NHS FOI responder person emailed Stonewall for help, Stonewall emailed them back a huffy petulant rant, and the FOI responder person accidentally copied and paste the Stonewall sulk into the reply.

I suspect the sulky rant was what Stonewall suggested they reply with. It's possible the FOI person there is just a Genderist nutter but that rant does rather have the flavour of Stonewall's recent comms.

If so the email from them saying "refuse the FOI" will eventually come out and that's another round of negative headlines.

I know the Genderists started this with all the power and money on their side but setting a bunch of public school babies against hardened feminist campaigners doesn't feel like a fair fight. They score more own goals than all our wins put together.

I wonder how much the NHSBSA pay for their subscription to the ENEI?

Employers Network for Equality & Inclusion

Do diversity networks always cost allot of money?

Are there not any open source ones?

I suspect that it might be around £10,000 per year for the enei based upon the subscription structure but do not know for sure.

For that you get fact sheets to help you write your policy to comply with disability and diversity legislation.

You also get an entry into the Top-100 Employers competition!

And a few , at the awards ceremony!

@FOJN

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.

archive: <a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210812050407/www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/what-we-do/work-us" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20210812050407/www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/what-we-do/work-us

They were also inconsistent with their use of the disability confident logo.

Breeching crown copyright by displaying the wrong logo years before they actually got awarded the top status.

I'd also suspect Stonewall advised on/wrote the response.

But they really might just as well have stated: we've checked and we're sure that making this information public would damage Stonewall and us, and we've absolutely definitely got something to hide.

I believe that the NHSBSA's relationship with ENEI is absolutely scandalous though!

I think that in 2019 this charity had an active NHS chief executive on their board of directors.

Whilst at the same time they had as their own Chief Exec, an ex-chief executive of an NHS trust!

Who payed herself ~£160,000 per year salary.

She did start the company charity though

Of course the ENEI is set up as a charity, for tax purposes.
They make their income from corporate subscriptions such as public utilities, public bodies and some private sector corps.

They do no receive any direct public donations

Does anyone know what the request for information actually said? The link only shows the text of the response to the request, not the request itself. If the request were unreasonably broad in nature, it can be rejected as the cost of answering FOIAs are not meant to be limitless.

@Artichokeleaves

I'd also suspect Stonewall advised on/wrote the response.

But they really might just as well have stated: we've checked and we're sure that making this information public would damage Stonewall and us, and we've absolutely definitely got something to hide.

It will be very telling to see if the NHSBSA voluntarily complies before they are eventually forced to.

Or if they are willing to splash even more public money over a legal fight.

Oh look, they actually did respond in June. Bit of a useless response. Why can't they issue the documents while redacting staff names?

www.whatdotheyknow.com/en/request/information_about_your_dealings_342#incoming-1763098

I wonder if anyone FOI'd to see if they corresponded with Stonewall before that first ridiculous response!

the-lies-they-tell.org/2021/09/12/pride-in-the-nhs-week-part-2-trans-and-non-binary-allyship/

I was reading something about FOI requests on here the other day.

Interesting.