We are pleasantly surprised that we have actually received a "substantive reply" from the Home Office, to a Freedom of Information Act request, in only 11 working days - they usually manage to exceed the statutory 20 working day limit.
As seem to be usual with the "not fit for purpose" Home Office IT systems, they managed to mangle the email attachment of the Microsoft Word document which they attached, but we eventually uu-decoded it successfully.
However,
From: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
To: [email address]
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:01:46 +0100Reference : T13353/8
Thank you for your e-mail enquiry of 17/06/2008 5:19:27 PM
A reply is attached.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please return it to the address
it came from telling them it is not for you and then delete it from your system.This email message has been swept for computer viruses.
**********************************************************************
Home Office
Direct Communications Unit
2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF
Switchboard 020 7035 4848 Fax: 020 7035 4745 Textphone: 020 7035 4742
E-mail: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Website: www.homeoffice.gov.uk
[email address]
Reference: T13353/82 July 2008
Dear Sir
Thank you for your e-mail of 17/06/2008 5:19:27 PM about the names and locations of "Prohibited Places" declared "by Order of a Secretary of State" under the Official Secrets Act 1911.
The Home Office does not hold the information that you have requested.
However, we have shared your email with the Ministry of Justice. It is possible that the Ministry of Justice may hold some information and that they may write to you in due course.
If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our handling of your request by submitting your complaint within two months to the below address:
Information Rights Team
Information and Record Management Service
Home Office
4th Floor, Seacole Building.access@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
During the independent review the department's handling of your information request will be reassessed by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.Yours sincerely
On behalf of Will Stuart
If there is no record of any Secretary of State signing an Order to declare anywhere specifically as a "Prohibited Place" under the Official Secrets Act 1911, then that could be quite important in the current War on Tourism and against Photographers' Rights, currently being waged by untrained private security guards, Police Community Support Officers and even by Police Constables.
There are classes of "Prohibited Places" laid down by Acts of Parliament, notably any Licensed Nuclear Site or telephone exchanges (and internet data infrastructure facilities) , or any Civil Aviation Authority airport (e.g. Heathrow) (although the status of photraphy e.g. by plane spotters from outside the perimeter fencing is not clear)
Military bases are usually Prohibited Places by virtue of being owned by the Crown,
However this is no longer automatically the case, for Government buildings, including some Ministry of Defence ones, and most of HM Treasury's HM Revenue and Customs and the Home Office's Identity and Passport Service ID Card / Passport interrogation centres, as some of these are now owned by private companies (some even hiding the legal ownership of these assets in overseas tax havens), and the land and buildings are only leased back to the Government, under various Private Finance Initiative schemes.
We will try sending the same FOIA request to the Ministry of Justice.
Read our original FOIA request, made on behalf of some very worried photographers (ourselves included):
Recent Comments