What the Ed Llewellyn email tells us about Government and ‘Freedom of Information’

I applaud No10s decision to publish the email (see below*) where David Cameron’s Chief-of-Staff, Ed Llewellyn, and Yates of the Yard discuss whether Cameron should be informed about hackgate. This allows us all to better understand why this particular decision was made and gives us a fuller understand why future decisions will be been taken.

Rather than the content of the message what fascinated me was what was missing. Both Yates and especially Llewellyn go out of their way to avoid using key phrases such as “phone-hacking”, “News of the World” and “News International”. The only explanation I can think of for doing this is to make sure that the email cannot be easily found if there is a freedom of information request. This email contained matters of national security so it is unlikely that it being leaked was a concern.

Unfortunately this type of mind-set is very common within Whitehall. Even though FoI legislation was brought in under his leadership, Tony Blair detested it’s reach. In order to stop information coming out – in a legitimate way – Blair used to have advice written on post-it notes which could then be thrown away. He also didn’t like having discussions minuted. After leaving office Blair went as far to say that introducing FoI was his biggest mistake.

Freedom of Information, transparency and openness are about a mentality, not just rules.

Here is the email. No10 have stated that Llewellyn’s reply “was discussed and agreed with the Permanent Secretary at No10″

10 September 2010: John Yates to Ed Llewellyn:

Ed,

Hope all well.

I am coming over to see the PM at 12.30 today regarding [redacted: national security] matters. I am very happy to have a conversation in the margins around the other matters that have caught my attention this week if you thought it would be useful.

Best wishes,

John

10 September 2010: Ed Llewellyn to John Yates:

John -

Thanks – all well.

On the other matters that have caught your attention this week, assuming we are thinking of the same thing, I am sure you will understand that we will want to be able to be entirely clear, for your sake and ours, that we have not been in contact with you about this subject.

So I don’t think it would really be appropriate for the PM, or anyone else at No 10, to discuss this issue with you, and would be grateful if it were not raised please.

But the PM looks forward to seeing you, with Peter Ricketts and Jonathan Evans, purely on [redacted: national security] matters at 1230.

With best wishes,

Ed

Related posts:

1. Freedom of information part 1
2. The government should end its information monopoly
3. My supermarket can teach the government some relationship lessons
4. Schools and Home Information Packs
5. A casual relationship with personal information