[icsys]

Originally Posted by R Jones

Now that is timely. The article focusses on the DBERR, formerly the Department of Twiddling and Inaction/Trade and Industry. Our friends that are coming under fire from their noble Lords, the Baroness Miller and Lord Northesk. Let's hit them from the citizenry end too with FOI requests.

Good to see a ruling from the Tribunal forcing them to come clean about who lobbies them and how, and who they talk to and when etc. That is very good news for us. If Phorm is just about commercial advantage, then the DBERR can't really refuse to divulge any lobbying or conversations about the system. So the only grounds for refusal to divulge contacts between DBERR and Phorm will have to be more substantial. Which will tell us a lot.

The FOI focus needs now to focus on DBERR and what they did and didn't know about Phorm, and who they did and didn't talk to about Phorm and when.

snip

So - what questions should we be asking of the DBERR? I imagine that we could take the Lord's questions as a guide.

snip

Originally Posted by Dephormation

I'd recommend the usual, keep to things they can photocopy initially and see where it takes you...

- Dates and content of all correspondence between BERR and BT/Virgin/Phorm since 2006
- Dates of meetings, and agendas, minutes, attendees
- Date BERR first became aware of the secret trials
- Dates Ministers (in particular John Hutton, Gareth Thomas, Shriti Vadera) were first advised that secret trials had been conducted
- Any instruction or advice to ICO concerning complaints

Most of this is already in hand at WhatdoTheyKnow
Responses are due around the end of August and early September.