By Andy McCue, 20 April 2006 13:50
NEWS
The Department of Health (DoH) is dragging its feet over releasing details of NHS IT chief Richard Granger's salary, bonuses and expenses despite a request made by silicon.com under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act.
silicon.com made a request on 1 February 2006 to the DoH asking for the salary, bonus and expense figures paid to Granger since his appointment in October 2002 as director general of IT for the NHS but the department claims releasing the information could breach his rights under the Data Protection Act.
The request is part of a wider silicon.com investigation into rewards for top IT bosses within the public sector and ensuring government projects stand a chance of attracting and retaining top talent.
Under the terms of the FoI Act public bodies have 20 working days to provide the information. Despite being asked, the DoH failed to acknowledge receipt of the request and then responded at the end of the time limit on 2 March, saying it did have the information but would need an extra 15 working days to decide whether it is in the public interest to release it.
The email from the DoH's customer service centre said: "The specific exemption which applies to your request is section 40(2) as we believe that full disclosure of Mr Granger's salary, bonus and expenses could put the Department in breach of its obligation to respect Mr Granger's rights under the Data Protection Act 1998."
This is despite guidance from the Information Commissioner, the UK's data protection watchdog, saying that expenses incurred in the course of official business and salary details of senior public officials can be released under the FoI Act without breaching an individual's rights under the DPA.
At the end of those additional 15 working days the DoH responded again, on 23 March, saying it had still not come to a decision on where the balance of public interest lies in disclosing Granger's salary details and that it would need another 15 working days.
The DoH failed to respond at the time when asked for the reasons why it was taking so long to come to a decision on releasing the information. But then on 13 April, at the end of the 15 working days, silicon.com received another email saying that the DoH still had not come to a decision and would now need an extra 20 working days.
The DoH email said: "We now estimate that it will take an additional 20 working days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we plan to let you have a response by 16 May 2006. If it appears that it will take longer than this to reach a conclusion, we will keep you informed."
silicon.com has now made an official complaint to the DoH about the delay in providing the information requested about Granger's salary, bonuses and expenses under the FoI Act.
Dan Tench, partner at law firm Olswang, called the DoH's delay in simply deciding whether to release the information "unconscionable" and he accused officials of stringing silicon.com along.
He said: "The greater the public interest the more balance weighs in favour of disclosure. It's plain that this information should be disclosed."
The DoH's delay is typical of the obstructive approach to FoI taken by many public bodies, he added. "The reality is there is a mix of some public authorities complying but plenty are unreconstructed and use any ruse or method to escape disclosing information," he said.
The DoH is refusing to release Granger's salary and remuneration details at a time when the £6.2bn NHS IT project is expected to be criticised by a National Audit Office report and following delays to the project that have cost one of its IT contractors, Accenture, $450m.
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Martin Anderson
We should not be surprised by this. It is typical of the culture of spin engendered by this government. Information will be provided but only if it is deemed to be in the governments interest. Anything else will be hidden, obfuscated or delayed until it is no longer relevant.
2. Dennis Howlett
The sadness here is that by obfuscating around the issues, government heightens suspicion around what appears to be an entitlement culture.
3. anonymous
I have long held the opinion that the terminology used in headlines such as these is wrong. Do these people holding such positions really work 10 or 20 times harder than, say, your average computer programmer working for a private company to “earn” the salaries they get paid? I think not.
4. anonymous
It was no secret that when he was first engaged he was the highest paid civil servant, the rumor was £200K £250k almost as much as a GP!
5. Dennis Howlett
The sadness here is that by obfuscating around the issues, government heightens suspicion around what appears to be an entitlement culture.
6. Bill Ward
But of course the DoH is delaying an answer. Delay is exactly what the NHS excels at. Recently my GP referred me to a local hospital (hip replacement); 60 days after the hospital received the referral I received a circular saying that they knew it was too long but it would be up to 12 months before an appointment could be made. Eventually the appointment was made and I was told treatment would be in 9 months time.
Is there any organisation more skilled at managed delay and the (mis)management of statistics than the DoH?