Image from Google Jackets

Lord Baker V Information Commissioner and Department of Communities and Local Government [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: EA/2006/0043, 1 June 2007. Lord Baker (B) appealed against a decision of the Information Commissioner (I) to refuse to release the advice given by civil servants to the Deputy Prime Minister. This advice had led to the building of a 50-storey residential block on the South Bank of the Thames, against the advice of the planning inspector who had held an inquiry into the scheme. B felt that civil servants would have also advised against approving the scheme and that the Secretary of State had gone against all advice offered him. I had ruled that information presented to the Deputy Prime Minister could be released, but only with officials' advice edited out. In this hearing, the Government's chief planner argued that officials' advice would be less frank if they knew their views would be published. "Held": The publishing of civil servants' views would not undermine to any significant extent. The Secretary of State's decision was significantly at odds with local planning practices. I was given until 29 June to publish the information, but may yet appeal. This case was judged on its own merit. The tribunal made clear that future cases will have to be judged on their own circumstances.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 138536-1001

EA/2006/0043, 1 June 2007. Lord Baker (B) appealed against a decision of the Information Commissioner (I) to refuse to release the advice given by civil servants to the Deputy Prime Minister. This advice had led to the building of a 50-storey residential block on the South Bank of the Thames, against the advice of the planning inspector who had held an inquiry into the scheme. B felt that civil servants would have also advised against approving the scheme and that the Secretary of State had gone against all advice offered him. I had ruled that information presented to the Deputy Prime Minister could be released, but only with officials' advice edited out. In this hearing, the Government's chief planner argued that officials' advice would be less frank if they knew their views would be published. "Held": The publishing of civil servants' views would not undermine to any significant extent. The Secretary of State's decision was significantly at odds with local planning practices. I was given until 29 June to publish the information, but may yet appeal. This case was judged on its own merit. The tribunal made clear that future cases will have to be judged on their own circumstances.