Flying Costs

Request Number: FOI/14656

Category: Organisational Information - Police Vehicles

Subject: Flying Costs

Request and Answer: 
In relation to request number FOI/14656 Police Service of Northern Ireland is providing an NCND response and will explain this further in the response below.

Request
The cost of flying and maintenance the PSNI Islander Aircraft for 1 year before the contract with [Name supplied]

The cost for 1 year following the contact agreement with [Name supplied] for flying and maintenance for the PSNI Islander Aircraft.

Answer
In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for this particular request. The Police Service of Northern Ireland can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information you have requested.

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in the request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.

Where exemptions are relied upon Section 17(1) of FOIA requires that we provide the applicant with a notice which

a) states that fact,
b) specifies the exemptions in question and
c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) can Neither Confirm Nor Deny that it holds the information relevant to your request as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply by virtue of the following exemptions:

The full text of exemptions can be found at www.legislation.gov.uk and further guidance on how they operate can be located on the Information Commissioners Office website www.ico.org.uk.

Section 31(3) - Law Enforcement - The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would or would be likely to, prejudice any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1).

Section 38 (2) – Health and Safety – the duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with Section (1) (a) would or would likely endanger the safety of an individual.

PSNI follow the Information Commissioner’s Guidance in relation to ‘NCND’ and you may find it helpful to refer to this at the following link:

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guidance-index/freedom-of-information-and-environmental-information-regulations/when-to-refuse-to-confirm-or-deny-holding-information/

‘Neither Confirm nor Deny’ (NCND)
There may be occasions when complying with the duty to confirm or deny under section 1(1)(a) would in itself disclose sensitive or potentially damaging information that falls under an exemption. In these circumstances, the Act allows a public authority to respond by refusing to confirm or deny whether it holds the requested information.

The decision to issue a ‘neither confirm nor deny’ response is not affected by whether we do or do not hold the information but relates to the consequences of confirming or denying the information is held. The starting point and main focus in most cases will be theoretical considerations about the consequences of confirming or denying that a particular type of information is held. The decision to neither confirm nor deny is separate from a decision not to disclose information and needs to be taken entirely on its own merits.

Section 31 is prejudice based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm that would be caused in releasing the requested information, as well as considering the public interest to ensure that withholding the information is the appropriate response.

Harm for Section 31
The release of some contractual information specifically around contract description, supplier name and product used by PSNI, could reveal capabilities available to the PSNI and consequently give important information to those with criminal intent. The release of this information combined with detailed information readily available on the internet, would allow terrorists and other criminals to identify the strengths and weaknesses of our capabilities. They would be able to use information in planning terrorist and criminal acts. The release of this information would therefore impact on the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of terrorists and criminals and increase the fear of crime in the community PSNI seeks to serve.

Public Interest Test
Factors favouring disclosure - Section 31
There is a  public interest in knowing how public money is being spent in ensuring value for money both at the point of purchase, and also in respect of what those resources are to be used for.

Factors favouring non-disclosure - Section 31
There is a strong public interest in ensuring PSNI’s effective law enforcement capability. Disclosure of supplier names and if we hold or don’t hold a contract with them would mean that individuals could research details about capabilities available to the PSNI. This may allow terrorists and criminals the opportunity to assess strengths and any possible weaknesses of these capabilities. This would compromise law enforcement which could lead to more crime being committed and individuals being placed at risk. This information may also be used by criminals/terrorists in combination with other information they have gathered to try and disrupt law enforcement.

Balance Test
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of monetary spend by the PSNI, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police law enforcement capability and all of the information which assists with protection of the police infrastructure, in being able to effectively deliver a policing service.

Decision
As release of contractual information could highlight capabilities available to the PSNI it is in the public interest not to release this information.

Section 38 is a prejudiced based, qualified exemption which means the PSNI must demonstrate harm in disclosure and consider the balance of the public interest in releasing the information.
A summary of the Harm and Public Interest Test for Section 38 is provided below.

Harm
Detail in relation to supplier names and if we have or have not a contract with any supplier would likely highlight the direct association of the supplier with the PSNI. Release of information under FOI is considered a release to the world in general, not just to the individual requesting the information. The threat of terrorism in Northern Ireland remains “substantial”, this is particularly relevant to PSNI, its officers, staff and wider infrastructure.

Public Interest Test
Factors Favouring Release - Section 38
Releasing the information would promote openness and transparency. There is always a strong public interest in information that relates to the use of public funds.

Factors Favouring Retention - Section 38
Releasing the details of PSNI contract into the public domain may assist those intent on subverting law and order. The current terrorism threat level in Northern Ireland against PSNI is rated as ‘substantial’. There is a public interest in not making information about the PSNI infrastructure available which would assist those intent on causing harm.

Balance Test
Terrorist activity is a real and current threat in Northern Ireland and the PSNI has a duty of care to protect all individuals including those associated with it and who support its ability to carry out its law enforcement activity.

Decision
Whilst accountability surrounding the use of public funds is always a strong argument in favour of releasing information, the balance will always favour retention where there is any risk no matter how slight to the safety of individuals. In this case, PSNI considers the balance of the public interest favours non-disclosure.

However, this should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the information you requested exists or does not exist.