diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | app/views/help/about.rhtml | 63 |
1 files changed, 34 insertions, 29 deletions
diff --git a/app/views/help/about.rhtml b/app/views/help/about.rhtml index 3c43abc23..2960778df 100644 --- a/app/views/help/about.rhtml +++ b/app/views/help/about.rhtml @@ -471,7 +471,7 @@ needing any email, using the "respond to request" link at the bottom of each request page. </dd> -<dt id="days">You've calculated our deadline wrongly!<a href="#days">#</a> </dt> +<dt id="days">How do you calculate the deadline shown on request pages?<a href="#days">#</a> </dt> <dd> <p>The Freedom of Information Act says:</p> @@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ to have more of that complexity visible.</p> </dd> -<dt id="days2">But really, you calculated it wrong!<a href="#days2">#</a> </dt> +<dt id="days2">But really, how do you calculate the deadline?<a href="#days2">#</a> </dt> <dd> @@ -525,35 +525,10 @@ see a problem with a particular request, let us know and we'll fix it.</li> <p>The date thus calculated is shown on requests with the text "By law, Liverpool City Council should normally have responded by...". There is only -one case which is not normal. +one case which is not normal, see the next question about +<a href="#public_interest_test">public interest test time extensions</a>. </p> -<ul> - -<li>The Freedom of Information Act lets authorities claim an indefinite time -extension when applying a <strong>public interest test</strong>. Information -Commissioner guidance says that it should only be used in "exceptionally -complex" cases -(<a href="http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/foi_good_practice_guidance_4.pdf">FOI Good Practice Guidance No. 4</a>). -WhatDoTheyKnow doesn't specifically handle this case, which is why we -use the word "normally". -</li> - -<li>The same guidance says that, even in exceptionally complex cases, no -Freedom of Information request should take more than <strong>40 working days</strong> -to answer. WhatDoTheyKnow displays requests which are overdue by that much -with stronger wording to indicate they are definitely late. - -<li>The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act does not allow such a public -interest extension. WhatDoTheyKnow would like to see the law changed to either -remove the extension from the UK Act, or to reintroduce an absolute time limit -of 40 working days even with the extension (the House of Lords <a -href="http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2000-10-17&number=1&house=lords">voted -to remove</a> provision for such a time limit). -</li> - -</ul> - <p>Schools are also a special case, which WhatDoTheyKnow displays differently. </p> @@ -571,6 +546,36 @@ Meanwhile, remember that the law says authorities must respond </dd> +<dt id="public_interest_test">How do you reflect time extensions for public interest tests?<a href="#public_interest_test">#</a> </dt> + +<dd> + +<p>The Freedom of Information Act lets authorities claim an indefinite time +extension when applying a <strong>public interest test</strong>. Information +Commissioner guidance says that it should only be used in "exceptionally +complex" cases +(<a href="http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/foi_good_practice_guidance_4.pdf">FOI Good Practice Guidance No. 4</a>). +WhatDoTheyKnow doesn't specifically handle this case, which is why we use the +phrase "should normally have responded by" when the 20 working day time is +exceeded. +</p> + +<p>The same guidance says that, even in exceptionally complex cases, no +Freedom of Information request should take more than <strong>40 working days</strong> +to answer. WhatDoTheyKnow displays requests which are overdue by that much +with stronger wording to indicate they are definitely late. +</p> + +<p>The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act does not allow such a public +interest extension. WhatDoTheyKnow would like to see the law changed to either +remove the extension from the UK Act, or to reintroduce an absolute time limit +of 40 working days even with the extension (the House of Lords <a +href="http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2000-10-17&number=1&house=lords">voted +to remove</a> provision for such a time limit during the initial passage +of the UK Act through Parliament). +</p> +</dd> + <dt id="large_file">How can I send a large file, which won't go by email?<a href="#large_file">#</a> </dt> <dd>Instead of email, you can respond to a request directly from your web |