Subject: Benzodiazepine addiction
 To: “Raine, Dr June” june.raine@mhra.gsi.gov.uk

 Dear Dr Raine,
 Thank you for your response of 24th September. I have a further question.
�
I have attached a communication from Professor Malcolm Lader to
 Professor Cawley sent in January 1982, giving evidence that
 benzodiazepine use had caused brain damage.
 What action did the regulatory authority take when it became aware of
 this evidence?
�
Regards John Perrott

CATscans001

Our ref: DE538279

13 September 2010

Dear Mr Perrott

Thank you for your letter of 2 September, which was addressed to Jacky Buchan of the Customer Service Centre (CSC). This response will address your specific request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, as CSC have responded separately to the other issues you raised.

However, before I answer your FOI request, I would like to clarify the point you raised about a response provided by the FOI team to another applicant on 13 August, in which we had stated:

“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.”

As you may already know, we wrote to the applicant on 1 September, to explain and apologise:

“We have undertaken a review into the handling of this request. Specifically, you were concerned that the statement relating to the audit of prescribing records and survey of addiction specialists was incorrect.

Firstly, I should apologise for any confusion caused by our response.

This was due to a misunderstanding between the FOI Team and the policy team, and I am sorry that this caused inaccurate information to be sent to you. We will be putting in safeguards to minimise the risk of this happening again.

The situation remains as it was when Jim Dobbin MP met with the Minister in June 2010. Work on the literature review, services survey and an audit of GP prescribing will be completed by the end of the year when it will be shared with stakeholders and used to inform future policy.”

Turning our attention to your own FOI request, you asked for:

1. The number of people who have written to the Department in the last three years regarding benzodiazepine or z drug addiction.

I have conducted a search of the Department of Health’s correspondence database, and 89 items of correspondence relating to benzodiazepine or z drug addiction were received between 1 September 2007 and 31 August 2010. Some of the items were written by correspondents who had contacted the Department on more than one occasion. Therefore, 45 people wrote to the Department on 89 occasions over the past three years. As a further note, 17 of the correspondents were MPs, who, in some cases, were writing on behalf of constituents who had contacted the Department separately.

It is possible that other correspondence may have been sent directly to policy officials. However there are 200 policy teams within the Department, all of whose records would need to be searched in order to provide an authoritative response to your request. We estimate that doing so would engage Section 12(2) of the FOI Act. Section 12 of the FOI Act allows public bodies to refuse requests where the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit. This is set at 3.5 working days or £600 for central Government.

Your request was forwarded to teams whose areas of responsibility were the most relevant to benzodiazepine or z drug addiction, but they confirmed that searching their records to establish whether they hold any information relevant to both your questions would exceed the appropriate limit specified under s12.

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.

It may be helpful to explain that the Customer Service Centre, when answering correspondence, will inform policy teams if new issues are raised. Although policy teams are unable to confirm whether they hold any Ministerial briefings, reports, minutes of meetings or documents that were prepared in response to such correspondence, I can confirm that 32 of the responses had been signed by Ministers, who would therefore have been aware of individual cases.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request a review of our decision, you should write to:

Head of the Freedom of Information Team
Department of Health
Room 317
Richmond House
79 Whitehall,
London
SW1A 2NS
Email: freedomofinformation@dh.gsi.gov.uk

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by the Department. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

The Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Lynn Swyny

FOI Case Manager
Department of Health

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