We gave the announcement some protection on the time, exploring the response from the schooling sector and reporting that questions had been requested of the choice to ‘bypass parliament’ and as a substitute break the information at a party-political occasion.
We additionally requested the federal government some questions in an try to fill within the appreciable gaps within the particulars in regards to the CTE. How a lot was it going to price to determine, and the way a lot to run annually? How lengthy wouldn’t it take to arrange? Did the federal government communicate to some other organisations earlier than deciding to go forward?
In any case, this was being offered as one thing transformational for Scottish education, however hadn’t appeared anyplace within the manifestos from which the present SNP/Inexperienced authorities is deriving its mandate.
Sadly, however unsurprisingly, issues didn’t begin off very properly. As we reported on the time, the Scottish Authorities refused to reply any of our questions, or to offer any remark in relation to them. You might need thought that they’d be eager to speak, in depth, a few new, headline-grabbing coverage – however apparently not.
Clearly, simply asking wasn’t going to be sufficient – we’d must strive utilizing transparency legal guidelines as a substitute.
5 FOIs and a matter of ‘complexity’
On October 19, I submitted 5 Freedom of Data (FOI) requests in regards to the Centre for Educating Excellence.
The primary requested for details about the timeline of the coverage’s improvement. Request quantity two centered on the anticipated prices of organising and operating the CTE. Quantity three requested in regards to the remit of the proposed physique and whether or not it might exchange, or sit along with, any current schooling our bodies. The fourth and fifth requests had been involved with any conferences held to develop the coverage, and any authorities communications – together with inside emails and, no less than in concept, Whatsapp messages – about it.
Public our bodies are legally required to answer FOI requests in a most of twenty working days, which gave the federal government till November 16 to collect the related materials and ship it to me.
Most learn in schooling:
As a substitute, I obtained an e mail on that date telling me that the response wouldn’t be offered throughout the authorized timelines. This was as a result of obvious “complexity of the knowledge concerned”.
On November 24 I obtained one other e mail. This one didn’t comprise any FOI responses both – simply additional notification that the authorized timeline wouldn’t be adopted.
After I contacted the federal government to ask for an replace, I obtained additional emails on November 29 (“I wish to reassure you that we’re working laborious to reply as rapidly as potential and that issuing a response is a precedence for us”), November 30 (“We’re conscious of our statutory obligations underneath FOISA and are working to have the response issued to you as a matter of urgency”) and December 6 (“We’re treating it as pressing and proceed to work to have the response with you as promptly as potential.”)
The response and related paperwork lastly arrived on December 11, full with in depth redactions, utilizing 5 totally different authorized exemptions, in an try to preserve a major quantity of fabric a secret.
The ‘trawl’ and constructing of a time line
The usual response to any Scottish Authorities FOI disclosure is, sadly, to train your proper to a evaluate, to make sure that all the things has been made accessible to you. Over greater than a decade I’ve realized that whenever you problem exemptions, you virtually all the time get extra materials launched to you, and that it’s not unusual for brand new, related paperwork to seem, as if by magic, whenever you insist that they test their data once more.
Having reviewed its dealing with of my authentic requests, the federal government determined to face by a lot of the secretive redactions. In a number of cases, they realised that their argument wouldn’t rise up primarily based on the exemption that had been utilized, in order that they merely determined to use a unique exemption as a substitute, secure within the information that this motion couldn’t be challenged with out a months-long (if I’m fortunate) enchantment to the nationwide regulator, the Scottish Data Commissioner.
Learn extra:
The evaluate response additionally acknowledged that I had requested “quite a lot of questions in regards to the specifics of how the response was managed”. The official even helpfully listed these questions earlier than unhelpfully deciding to refuse to reply them.
However I’d been down this highway earlier than and knew one other option to discover that data, whether or not the federal government wished to share it or not.
Freedom of Data laws permits anybody to request materials held by a public physique. What most individuals don’t know is that paperwork, case recordsdata and communications associated to FOI requests additionally depend as FOI-able materials. Meaning which you could submit what is typically referred to as a meta-FOI, permitting you to see for your self no less than a number of the particulars round how your request was dealt with, and the responses to those might be fascinating.
It took three additional FOI requests to come up with the supplies I wanted however, ultimately, I used to be capable of assemble a timeline of the dealing with of my preliminary FOI request. Doing so concerned trawling via round 300 pages of paperwork.
To date, so good. Till…
Studying via the e-mail chains it seems to be as if officers had been doing all the things proper. An preliminary deadline for departments to answer the requests was set for November 1, giving a two-week window wherein to collate supplies, apply redactions, get the discharge signed off and ship it on to me. To date, so good.
Per week after that, on December 9, a draft response was despatched to Clare Hicks, the federal government’s Director of Training Reform. Some materials seems to have been eliminated at this stage, and a brand new response is then despatched for clearance from the Particular Advisers.
Evidently additional adjustments had been requested at this stage after an official confirmed that that they had “reviewed each paperwork in gentle of SpAds’ views”. An e mail detailing their feedback has, nevertheless, been redacted virtually in its entirety, so it’s unattainable to know precisely what they had been as much as.
All of the officers wanted now was for Jenny Gilruth to log out the response, a step required as a result of my requests had been deemed to be ‘delicate’. There is no such thing as a authorized requirement for ministers to log out FOI responses, neither is this finished in all circumstances.
The paperwork had been despatched “for clearance” to the schooling secretary on November 21.
It’s at this level that all the things appears to have floor to a halt.
“And as soon as once more I’ll affirm I’m conscious of this”
The day after the supplies had been despatched to Jenny Gilruth’s workplace for clearance, an official tried to contact her in an effort to “get a broad concept of when Cab Sec might need area to have a look at this and a response may come.” Two days later, Gilruth’s deputy non-public secretary confirmed that the fabric was “at the moment with the Cab Sec and marked as pressing”, however added {that a} response earlier than the next Monday is unlikely.
4 days later, on November 28, officers once more contacted Gilruth’s workplace in regards to the case. The deputy non-public secretary initially responded by advising that “Cab Sec is at a convention all day however I’ll observe up once more when Ms Gilruth is again which must be shortly after 4pm.”
At 4.30pm, the officers requested for an extra replace however obtained a one-line response from Gilruth’s non-public secretary: “We’re absolutely conscious of this.”
Officers tried once more on November 30, advising that it might be “useful” to have the ability to ship the response “earlier than the top of the week.” They obtained one other one-line response from Gilruth’s non-public secretary: “And as soon as once more I’ll affirm I’m conscious of this.”
In response to an extra try to maneuver the method alongside, this time on December 4, Gilruth’s non-public secretary suggested that the FOI response was “nonetheless in hand.”
Then, on December 6, an unidentified official engaged with the federal government’s specialist FOI Unit. They said that the response was already “overdue by round 3 weeks” and added: “It’s sitting with Cab Sec and we’re pushing for a response however nothing but…”
Two days later, yet one more request was made for the schooling secretary to cope with the excellent FOI response, with an unidentified official declaring that “it might be actually useful” if the fabric might be “reviewed and cleared by the Cupboard Secretary as quickly as potential.”
Lastly, on December11 , Jenny Gilruth was “content material to clear the response”, which was then despatched to me at quarter previous 5 that night.
Greater than only a germ of the concept?
So, in spite of everything that, what have we managed to study in regards to the Centre for Educating Excellence?
The primary point out of the CTE appears to have taken place on September 22, when Particular Adviser Sean McGivern requested two high-ranking schooling officers – Graeme Logan and Clare Hicks – to “work up some high-level, preliminary recommendation on what this may appear like”.
Some materials within the authentic e mail, and Clare Hicks’ subsequent response, has been redacted, and the strategy for doing so makes it unattainable to know simply how a lot has been saved secret. The e-mail’s topic line, nevertheless, is “Recommendation – centre for instructing excellence”, so though there aren’t any different paperwork accessible, the plan actually appears to have been extra than simply the germ of an concept.
As for the function and remit of the CTE, the federal government would solely say that this form of element might be labored out “as a part of the co-design course of” – which means, imprecise platitudes apart, we nonetheless don’t actually know what the brand new centre will really do.
Of the probably price, we all know even much less, and in all of the a whole lot of pages I’ve scrolled via, I didn’t discover something to counsel that even a ballpark determine has been calculated. This is able to be unbelievable and deeply irresponsible at the very best of occasions, however it’s utterly indefensible for a authorities at the moment overseeing monetary cuts which are doing main harm to Scottish schooling.
Learn extra Scottish Authorities information:
As for the method concerned in investigating all of this, the federal government has clear inquiries to reply.
The response to my FOI requests – which had been solely submitted after officers had refused to reply some straight-forward questions – was almost a full calendar month late, which is dangerous sufficient, however the function of the schooling secretary in apparently inflicting that delay should be the topic of additional investigation.
Responding to this story, a Scottish Authorities spokesperson stated: “The Scottish Authorities dealt with greater than 5,500 FOI requests in 2023, a major improve since 2022. In his most up-to-date replace report the earlier Scottish Data Commissioner recognised the numerous progress the Scottish Authorities had made on responding on time to requests.
“Within the second half of final yr, 95% obtained a response throughout the 20-day timescale. Ministers have revealed a refreshed Freedom of Data Enchancment Plan this month.”
