West Berkshire Council in ombudsman threat

Earlier this month the Information Commissioner rebuked the district council for blocking Mrs Giggins’ Freedom of Information requests.
He went on to rule that the fact that the council had a financial interest in the outcome of the planning application at the centre of the row was a “legitimate area of inquiry.”
In its response, the council agreed to comply with the requests rather than face a contempt action in the High Court.
But Mrs Giggins, who lives in Priory Road, Hungerford, said this week: “The council’s reply implies that I have wasted taxpayers’ money by pursuing this matter. It is clear that they still hold the view that I am vexatious, and I am clearly not going to receive an apology, or presumably a lifting of the ‘blacklisting’ imposed by (West Berkshire Council chief executive) Nick Carter without further action.”
Mrs Giggins initially wrote to the council’s monitoring officer asking him to investigate the approval of the application to redevelop the Priory and Platt Court in Hungerford back in November 2010.
Mrs Giggins said the council then tried to block her investigation by branding her Freedom of Information (FOI) Act inquiries “vexatious.”
She complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which investigated and case officer Steven Dickinson ruled in her favour.
Last September Mrs Giggins asked for the information including any correspondence between the council and the applicant, agent, consultees or objectors relating to the requirement, or lack thereof, for an environmental impact assessment or screening option.
The same month the council refused the request on the grounds that it was vexatious and confirmed its decision following an internal review.
Following the intervention of the Information Commissioner, the council produced a further response – this time branding the request “manifestly unreasonable.”
Mr Dickinson noted that the council had “agreed to enter into a risk-sharing arrangement with the developers, which indicates that the council had a financial interest in the outcome of the planning and development and that the complainant contends that the council is attempting to use the provisions of FOI and EIR regulations to delay answering her questions until such time as the information is no longer useful.”
In his report, Mr Dickinson said: “The Commissioner’s decision is that West Berkshire Council has incorrectly applied the provisions of regulation….and, by its refusal of the request, has not dealt with the request in accordance with the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) 2004.”
Mrs Giggins’ requests were neither vexatious nor unreasonable, he ruled.
This week Mrs Giggins added: “I have therefore now referred the matter to the local government ombudsman.”
West Berkshire Council spokesman Keith Ulyatt replied: “It is not a case of 'blacklisting' but of using public resources, and therefore taxpayers’ money, wisely.
“We are disappointed by the decision because all the information requested by Mrs Giggins is there for her to see in the public planning file without the need for her to go through the freedom of information process.”