~ archived since 2018 ~

UK Freedom Of Information Request Made To Camden Council (29 May 2013) Concerning RadFem 2013 STILL Not Answered and Also Subjected To Censorship

Imnotmrabut

June 27, 2013

23 upvotes

/r/MensRights

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/radfem_2013_at_the_camden_centre#comment-40578

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	UK Freedom Of Information Request Made To Camden Council (29 May 2013) Concerning RadFem 2013 STILL Not Answered and Also Subjected To Censorship
Author	Imnotmrabut
Upvotes	23
Comments	9
Date	June 27, 2013 1:28 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1h6dbg/uk_freedom_of_information_request_made_to_camden/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/uk-freedom-of-information-request-made-to-camden.1170066 https://theredarchive.com/post/1170066

Comments

[–]pocketknifeMT 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Imnotmrabut[S] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

@pocketknifeMT Sorry - could you explain what you mean!

I have seen many FOI requests issued publicly in the last Decade, and this is the first that I have ever seen where content has been removed!

I'm actually aware of the content of the original as it's in the public domain at other venues - One - Two

I'm amazed that pointing out such details as “No Delegation” clause of the Public Sector Equality Duty - Equality Act is in play and for it to be removed. It has a rather significant impact upon both the reason for the FOI Request - and it should inform at all levels and response by Camden Council.

As a human rights advocate dealing in gay rights since the start of the 1980's and disability rights for over 20 years I'm staggered to see that report of conduct such as Radfem is ignored, when other goroups would be banned instantly.

FFor F sake - they even banned a petting zoo due to concerns over animal welfare! Ekram Alam's Animal Fayre banned in 2011

Of course Camden Council were obliged to also note any and all concerns expressed to them as to the Known Conduct of #radfem2013 and their camp followers - especially their activities which are "Hate Crime" in the UK.

Some examples of that activity coming from WITHIN the Camden Centre, London, can found on this internal link in Reddit. http://redd.it/1g09hy

And that lot is just the tip of the iceberg.

So please do clarify what you mean when you say "Thats just not how FOIA requests work." - and if possible do give links to any sources that support the just how it works meme!

[–]pocketknifeMT 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

FOIA requests are for documents, assuming they are publically available (you can't request a government employee's medical records for example)

Requesting RADFEM's application and any materials and email chains generated by the venue in regard to that specific booking would be a valid format for a FOIA request.

Writing an angry letter demanding answers != FOIA request

Look at the first comment on the website:

Ideally FOI requests should simply describe the information being sought.

Our site is only for making FOI requests and the use of our site for other correspondence is not appropriate; campaigning, calling for action etc. should take place elsewhere or in direct correspondence with the public body.

Regards,

Richard - WhatDoTheyKnow.com volunteer

Whoever made this "request" has absolutely no idea how FOIA requests work, and is maybe a little threadbare in the logic department to think a demand for an explanation is akin to requesting paperwork.

[–]powerpiglet 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]pocketknifeMT 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Imnotmrabut[S] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So glad that you got up to speed with the idea that US Law is not Universal and does not apply to other countries such as The UK. I know it's a shocking concept, but......

It's so odd, but that pattern of behaviour is exactly what people such as Cathy Brennan of RadFem fame has been up to - but as an Attorney from Maryland she is so arrogant as to believe she knows all about European and UK Law.

She made this lovely video of her being ejected from a London Venue for harassing patrons. It's a Hoot - I've been peeing myself each time I hear her say "Because You Are Violating The Law Of This Country For Asking Me To Leave For No Reason ..." , especially when she starts throwing around her limited knowledge of UK law on Equality and makes herself look such an Idiot for not having any knowledge of "Licensing" law and Trespass.

A Licence holder or authorised employee can require ANY person to leave licensed premises where there is any risk of a breach of the peace occurring. The Bug with her history of Bullying, her stated intent in advance to attend the venue and harass ... I just wish the police had been present to arrest and charge. Maybe even deport with prejudice! P¬)

Her followers may also have had a shock when told that being a lesbian is not a licence to abuse in the UK - and names a would have been taken.

Her behaviour gives a whole new meaning to Racism and Privilege. She's so Serial Bully and Sociopath.

One would think that someone who trades on supposed Attorney status would know better than to make stupid comment on camera and then be judged in the Court of Public Opinion ... as they The Law Is An Ass, and Cathy Brennan is a perfect example of the Idiom!

[–]Imnotmrabut[S] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh Dear me - @pocketknifeMT, you do seem to have a dull edge.

FOIA requests are for documents

Sorry that is wrong - requests apply to all Information held - and not just in document form. I do hope you aint working as an FOI Officer or involved in the process! You seem badly informed and likely to cause error. In fact your error harks back to data protection and the 1980's when Council Employees could not grasp Automatically processed vs Computer. A Microfiche reader that Automatically goes to a requested page also was caught under the Data Protection Act 1984.

Here's an easy read from the Information Commissioner on what is caught under Freedom Of Information:

Recorded information includes printed documents, computer files, letters, emails, photographs, and sound or video recordings.

What is the Freedom of Information Act?

Additional information supplied by a person as part of an FOI request is not for me, you or any officer to decide as "Thread Bare". It can be ever so useful in lazy FOI officers having to do a quality job and ensure that any and all relevant Information is provided.

Should the officer see connection but not relevance they should make inquiry of the person making the application to clarify if there is scope and - or connection.

After over 10 years you would think that extensive best practice by supposed professionals would make up for deficits held by uninitiated members of the public!

Would I also need to point out that removed content even falls under the Camden Council Complaints procedures and the Legal definition of Complaint to a Statutory Authority.

Our definition of a complaint A complaint is any expression of dissatisfaction with our services, whether justified or not.

It does not have to say complaint to be one! Even so the council are obliged to acknowledge any complaint within 5 working days and provide a full response in 20. They aint done that either!

So @pocketknifeMT - Do get up to speed with Public Administration and even Maladministration. I know it's hard, but someone has to do it! P¬)

And For The Record FOI Requests made later have received partial responses .... but it seems that if you have a Vagina ( or present yourself as a Vagina Owner) you get responses, but men are made to wait!

Now where's me reference book on Maladministration and Crossman?

" ... Bias, neglect, inattention, delay, incompetence, ineptitude, perversity, turpitude and arbitrariness and so on'."

That's been a legal issue since Crossman first raised it in 1967 - and the Parliamentry Ombudsman and All Government departments and agencies have been obliged to use it since 1992. Is Camden Council behind on it's In House Training for Staff - is that the reason for being 21 years behind the times?

Now looking at the Publicly Accessible evidence, I Can't prove bias but neglect, inattention, delay, perversity and arbitrariness are all in play. Of course Camden would hate to be found being Sexist or biased on basis of genitals as that would lead to questions about Equality - and could even lead to Questions under "The Protection From Harassment Act 1997"

I'm a most reasonable man and I can assure you that my view is simple - deliberately and knowingly treating a person negatively due to genitals is Harassment as it acts to vex and disturb. If that is occasioned by statutory authority it's still a crime and the relevant Officer such as a CEO or Mayor can be done!

So why is it that FOI requests made 31 May 2013 were getting responses by 12 May 2013 - or is it that there is clear and very PUBLIC evidence of maladministration, or is it sexism - or even both? Could It be harassment by officers of Camden Council who judge by perception of genitals over law?

The law says the Local Government Ombudsman can investigate alleged or apparent ‘maladministration’ or service failure. This can include:

delay

incorrect action or failure to take any action

failure to follow procedures or the law

failure to provide information

inadequate record-keeping

failure to investigate

failure to reply

misleading or inaccurate statements

inadequate liaison

inadequate consultation

broken promises

Oh and the Ombudsman use Crossman too!

http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ow_maladministration.html

Have A Nice Day... and hope the references help you deal with The Law and no any threadbare internal bias you have to the person Before The Law.

Cheers.

[–]powerpiglet 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Imnotmrabut[S] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure that pocketknifeMT can answer and your suspicions are not to be taken seriously, or even as relevant.

I do reality and facts not supposition built upon assumption and presumption. I have found that it works best that way when dealing with Legal Obligation and Liabilities of Public Bodies.

1) fact one te FOI request remains acknowledged 2) fact two - response ios over due 3) fact three - later FOPI requests made by the same route have been acknowledged and even responded to 4) Fact four - the responses in the public domain contain relevant information to the ignored FOI request and as such it has been possible for Camden Council to both acknowledge and even respond since at least 12 June 2013 5) Fact Five - that is a pattern in the UK called Public Maladministration.

Should other facts be revealed I will add them!

I do wonder what is the difference in response and administration? Do genitals count?