Ignoring the law

BRITISH Waterways could be held in contempt of court for its continued stance in ignoring Freedom of Information requests, with the Information Commissioner now asked to serve decision notices in respect of five requests.

The notices concern breeches of the Freedom of Information Act which requires British Waterways to respond in a timely manner to requests for information.  Should the notices be served  and British Waterways fail to comply then it could be held in contempt of court, writes Alan Richards.

Transition trustees

One of the requests for information notes that British Waterways has no policy of proactively publishing minutes of meetings of its transition trustees, and asks that these be provided to the public.  However, this request has been ignored despite the intervention of the information commissioner.

Steady state model

In British Waterways' company year 2010/11, two of its directors, Philip Ridal and Jim Stirling, were set personal bonus targets as follows: 'With Technical/Finance Director oversee the review of the Steady State model and recalculate for 2010 prices'. (Regular readers of narrowboatworld will not be surprised that British Waterways directors are awarded bonus for simply writing reports!)

Bearing in mind that this review would be used as the basis of British Waterways' future funding requirements, a request was made almost five months ago for the review outputs to be made publically available.  The Freedom of Information Act requires that a response is provided within 20 working days. However, British Waterways has not responded despite repeated reminders.  Now the informal intervention of the information commissioner has been unsuccessful as well.

Contradictory figures

British Waterways have given completely contradictory figures regarding the funding gap with Chief Executive Robin Evans saying that it is £39m and transition trustee, John Dodwell, and Technical director, Jim Stirling claiming that it is just £20m.  Even, the Inland Waterways Association is being contradictory, first saying that the funding gap is more than £40m but now asking the public to contact MP's and tell them it is only £20m.

Little wonder, then, that the output from the review is being withheld, and that the waterways minister has been asked  to make British Waterways replacement, the Canal & River Trust, exempt from the Act.  And little wonder that Inland Waterways Association supports the exemption!

Other requests

The above are just two of the five requests requests that, contrary to law, British Waterways has decided it can simply ignore. Hopefully, the waterways minister will decide that it is in the public interest that Canal & River Trust be subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

After all, it will be the same people running it!