Head of Freedom of Information Team                                   20 Greenacre Court
Department of Health                                                                      Lancaster
Room 317                                                                                             LA1 4LE
Richmond House
79 Whitehall
London                                                                                                  14th September 2010
SW1A 2NS

Ref: DE00000538279

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to you to request a review of your decision, to submit new FOI requests and to lodge various complaints regarding your team’s response by email of the 13^th September.

1. I originally contacted the Department of Health on the subject of prescribed benzodiazepine addiction. They blocked my enquiries (and those of others) by referring to their policy review on addiction to prescribed medicine.

It then came to my attention through Genevieve Lobo’s response of the 13^th August to a FOI request by Barry Haslam that no work had been done on the review. I queried this lack of work with the Department and they then referred me to the FOI team for clarification. The FOI team have not clarified this matter and instead provided answers to two questions that I did not ask.  I did not ask when the deadline for the review was or what happened at the meeting with the Minister in June 2010.

In a letter to Mr Haslam on the 1^st September, the FOI team reported that they had decided to undertake a review into the handling of this response and that a misunderstanding between the FOI Team and the policy team had ‘caused inaccurate information’ to be sent to him.

However, neither the FOI team or the Department of Health have denied the accuracy of Genevieve Lobo’s original statement which was; ‘The additional information about the three items requested cannot be sent at the present time as work on the first (literature) is not yet complete and the second two items (prescribing audit and specialist survey) have only just commenced in the last few weeks.’

Therefore the original question reverts back to the Department which was why has no work been done on the review?

2. I also wish to make a new FOI request for copies of all emails, minutes of meetings and documents between Genevieve Lobo, her manager and the Department of Health policy team and the Health Minister Anne Milton relating to this incident from the 1^st August 2010 to date.

3. In your email of the 13^th September you refer to 17 correspondents who were MPs. I also wish to make a new FOI request for the names of these correspondents and copies of their letters with personal information redacted.

4. I wish to appeal against your refusal to provide information in answer to these FOI requests:

1. The number of people who have written to the Department in the last three years regarding benzodiazepine or z drug addiction.
2. Copies of any briefings, reports, minutes of meetings or any documents prepared to inform Ministers of the content of these complaints, with personal information redacted.

The reason for my appeal is that the Department have a sophisticated, integrated and modern IT system. ‘Search’ is a basic function on an IT system and an electronic search could locate the correspondence in minutes. These 200 teams would not have to search their own individual records.

5. I wish to appeal against your refusal of my request for copies of briefings, reports, minutes of meetings and any other documents prepared to inform Ministers of the content of benzodiazepine correspondence (personal information redacted). The ground for my appeal is that ‘unable to confirm’ is not a valid reason under the Freedom of Information Act for refusal.

6. In your email to me of the 13^th September you state that 200 policy teams’ records would need to be searched to provide me with an authoritative response to my request. Does this mean that the issue of benzodiazepine addiction is spread over these 200 teams and that no one team is in overall control of this issue?

7. You state in your email to me of the 13th September that ‘they confirmed that searching their records…..relevant to both your questions….would exceed the appropriate limit specified under s12.’

Who are ‘they’ and please specify the teams and departments?

8. You state in your email of the 13th September that ‘I can confirm that 32 of the responses had been signed by Ministers, who would therefore have been aware of individual cases.’

What evidence can the FOI team provide to support the claim that Ministers would have been aware of individual cases? Signing responses is not the same as reading the original letters. Also, it is not for the FOI team to construct arguments to defend Departmental policies and process.

In summary I have submitted 2 new FOI requests, 2 appeals and 4 questions requiring responses in this letter,

Thank you for your continuing help in this matter,

Yours Sincerely

John Perrott

CCs:
Anne Milton MP  Minister for Health
Jim Dobbin MP Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction
Lord Sandwich Vice Chair
Eric Ollerenshaw MP
Phil Woolas MP
Kelvin Hopkins MP
Bill Cash MP
Greg Mulholland MP