Freedom of Information requests to the Climatic Research Unit
Encyclopedia
Freedom of Information requests to the Climatic Research Unit featured in press discussions of disputes over access to data from instrumental temperature record
s, particularly during the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
which began in November 2009.
The UK Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) came into effect in 2005, and FOI requests were made to the Climatic Research Unit
(CRU) at the University of East Anglia
(UEA) for the raw data from weather station
s used in developing instrumental temperature record
datasets, for copies of agreements under which the raw data was obtained from meteorology institutions, and also for email correspondence relating to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Fourth Assessment Report
.
In many cases the raw data which CRU had obtained from was subject to restrictions on redistribution: on 12 August 2009 CRU announced that they were seeking permission to waive these restrictions, and on 24 November 2009 the university stated that over 95% of the CRU climate data set had already been available for several years, with the remainder to be released when permissions were obtained. In a decision announced on 27 July 2011 the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) required release of raw data even though permissions had not been obtained or in one instance had been refused, and on 27 July 2011 CRU announced release of the raw instrumental data not already in the public domain, with the exception of Poland which was outside the area covered by the FOIA request.
A 2008 FOI request by David Holland for emails discussing work on the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report was refused by the university. In November 2009 he alleged that CRU emails posted online discussed deleting the emails he had requested: in January 2010 the Deputy Information Commissioner told a journalist that this indicated an offence under section 77 of the FOIA, but prosecution was time-barred by statute of limitations
. Newspapers misrepresented this as a decision in relation to raw data, and the issue was discussed by the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee
inquiry, which found there had been a lack of openness. The ICO decision published on 7 July 2010 stated that this potential offence had not been investigated as it was time-barred. As Holland was content not to proceed with his complaint against the university, no further action was needed, but the ICO would "consider whether further action is appropriate to secure future compliance."
developed its gridded CRUTEM
data set
of land air temperature anomalies based on instrumental temperature record
s held by around the world, often under formal or informal confidentiality agreements that restricted use of this raw data to academic purposes. Beginning in 1991, Phil Jones
of CRU discussed data with Warwick Hughes (later of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
), and from 2002 onwards had requests for raw data from Stephen McIntyre
for raw data relating to the hockey stick graph
as shown in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
(AR4) of 2001. At first Jones met their requests, but increasingly felt that he was inundated with requests that he could not meet due to time or confidentiality constraints, and in 2005 began refusing requests. In that year the new UK Freedom of Information Act
came into effect, and climate researchers discussed the scope and implications of FOIA requests which they saw as disrupting the time available for their work, and inappropriate for private emails.
Late in 2008, the university's FOI managers took advice from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) on exceptions allowing refusal of requests. Between 24 and 29 July 2009 the university received 58 FOI requests for raw data or details of the confidentiality agreements from McIntyre and his readers at the Climate Audit
blog. McIntyre complained that data denied to him had been sent to Peter Webster at Georgia Tech University
, who was working on a joint publication with Jones. On 12 August Nature News
published a statement by Jones that he was working to release the raw data in a systematic way, and was writing to all the National Meteorological Organisations requesting their agreement to waive confidentiality. Jonathan A. Jones
of the University of Oxford and Don Keiller of Anglia Ruskin University
in Cambridge
made FOIA requests for the data that Jones had sent to Webster. The requests were both refused by the UEA by 11 September 2009.
On 24 November 2009, four days after the start of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
, the university stated that over 95% of the CRU climate data set had already been available for several years, and the remainder would be released when permissions were given.
Requests were sent by the Met Office
to National Meteorological Organisations for agreement to waive confidentiality on raw instrumental data, as CRU had announced on 12 August 2009. Some gave full or conditional agreement, others failed to respond, and the request was explicitly refused by Trinidad and Tobago
and Poland
. In discussions with the ICO about the FOIA requests which Jones and Keiller had made before the email controversy had begun, the university argued that the data was publicly available from the Met organisations, and the lack of agreement exempted the remaining data. In its decision released on 23 June 2011, the ICO stated that the data was not easily available and there was insufficient evidence that disclosure would have an adverse effect on international relations. The ICO required the university to release the data covered by the FOIA request within 35 calendar days. On 27 July 2011 CRU announced release of the raw instrumental data not already in the public domain, with the exception of Poland which was outside the area covered by the FOIA request. The data are available for download from Met Office website and from CRU. The university remained concerned "that the forced release of material from a source which has explicitly refused to give permission for release could have some damaging consequences for the UK in international research collaborations."
, made a FOI request for all emails to and from Keith Briffa
about the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
(AR4); formal review exchanges had already been published. The University of East Anglia
(UEA) information policy and compliance manager (IPCM) refused the request.
Holland appealed to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) about the UEA's refusals of FOI requests he had made for emails to and from Briffa about the IPCC AR4 report. On 23 November 2009, after the start of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
, he wrote to the Commissioner explaining in detail the relevance of the alleged CRU emails to his case. In one of these sent in May 2008, Jones asked others to delete emails discussing AR4 with Briffa. ICO decisions are enforced under Section 50 by notices defining steps to be taken by the public authority within defined time limits, and failure to comply can be taken to court. In addition, Section 77 makes it an offence to intentionally destroy or conceal information which has been requested. In response to a Sunday Times
journalist who persistently asked why the ICO was not prosecuting under Section 77, Deputy Information Commissioner Graham Smith replied on 22 January 2010 that "The FOI Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information. Mr Holland's FOI requests were submitted in 2007/8, but it has only recently come to light that they were not dealt with in accordance with the Act. The legislation requires action within six months of the offence taking place, so by the time the action came to light the opportunity to consider a prosecution was long gone." The ICO was looking into other investigations time-barred by statute of limitations
restrictions to see if a case could be made to change the relevant law. The journalist's report as published in The Times
on 28 January portrayed this as an ICO decision that the university "broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny" but the ICO "could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late." The university promptly wrote to the ICO objecting to the damaging statement having been made to a journalist without first consulting the university. It described the misrepresentation by the press and requested retraction or clarification of the alleged breaches. The ICO declined to retract, but clarified that its investigation under Section 50 had not been completed and no decision notice had been issued. It said that "The fact that the elements of a section 77 offence may have been found here, but cannot be acted on because of the elapsed time, is a very serious matter. The ICO is not resiling from its position on this", and that "Errors like this are frequently made in press reports and the ICO cannot be expected to correct them, particularly when the ICO has not itself referred to penalties or sanctions in its own statement."
In its submission to the Science and Technology Select Committee, the university denied allegations that it had refused to release raw data in breach of the FOI Act, and said that the Deputy Information Commissioner's comments had been incorrectly reported as referring to such data. In its inquiry report, the Science and Technology Select Committee criticised the ICO, which it said had made "a statement to the press that went beyond that which it could substantiate", and recommended that it should develop procedures to check its public comments, and "swiftly correct any mis-statements or misinterpretations of such statements". While there was prima facie
evidence of a breach of Section 77 of the FOI Act, it would "be premature, without a thorough investigation affording each party the opportunity to make representations, to conclude that UEA was in breach of the Act." It called for a full investigation by the Muir Russell inquiry or by the Information Commissioner to resolve this issue, and accepted that the six month statute of limitations restriction was insufficient and should be reviewed. On the general issue of information requests, the committee said that information not covered by the exclusions provided by the FOIA should have been disclosed, and "in future information, including data and methodology, should be published proactively on the internet wherever possible." It blamed the university for mishandling Freedom of Information requests, and said it had “found ways to support the culture at CRU of resisting disclosure of information to climate change sceptics”.
The ICO decision on Holland's requests published on 7 July 2010 concluded that the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) applied rather than the equivalent FOIA, and the university had failed to provide responses within the correct time, but as Holland was content not to proceed with his complaint, no further action was needed. Regarding the question of whether there had been a breach of section 77 of the FOIA or its equivalent in the EIR, the ICO stated "Although the emails referred to above indicated prime facie evidence of an offence, the Commissioner was unable to investigate because six months had passed since the potential offence was committed, a constraint placed on the legislation by the Magistrates Court Act 1980." On the more general issue of emails suggesting that attempts to circumvent the legislation had been considered, and a lack of openness, the ICO would "now consider whether further action is appropriate to secure future compliance." In an opinion piece, Edward Acton
, Vice-Chancellor of the UEA, commended legislation in the US where "the FOI distinguishes between recorded factual material necessary to validate research findings, which must be disclosed, and ‘preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, plans for future research, peer reviews [and] communications with colleagues’, which are exempted."
Instrumental temperature record
The instrumental temperature record shows fluctuations of the temperature of the global land surface and oceans. This data is collected from several thousand meteorological stations, Antarctic research stations and satellite observations of sea-surface temperature. Currently, the longest-running...
s, particularly during the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
Climatic Research Unit email controversy
The Climatic Research Unit email controversy began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia...
which began in November 2009.
The UK Freedom of Information Act
Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is an Act of Parliament of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that creates a public "right of access" to information held by public authorities. It is the implementation of freedom of information legislation in the United Kingdom on a national level...
(FOIA) came into effect in 2005, and FOI requests were made to the Climatic Research Unit
Climatic Research Unit
The Climatic Research Unit is a component of the University of East Anglia and is one of the leading institutions concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change....
(CRU) at the University of East Anglia
University of East Anglia
The University of East Anglia is a public research university based in Norwich, United Kingdom. It was established in 1963, and is a founder-member of the 1994 Group of research-intensive universities.-History:...
(UEA) for the raw data from weather station
Weather station
A weather station is a facility, either on land or sea, with instruments and equipment for observing atmospheric conditions to provide information for weather forecasts and to study the weather and climate. The measurements taken include temperature, barometric pressure, humidity, wind speed, wind...
s used in developing instrumental temperature record
Instrumental temperature record
The instrumental temperature record shows fluctuations of the temperature of the global land surface and oceans. This data is collected from several thousand meteorological stations, Antarctic research stations and satellite observations of sea-surface temperature. Currently, the longest-running...
datasets, for copies of agreements under which the raw data was obtained from meteorology institutions, and also for email correspondence relating to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a scientific intergovernmental body which provides comprehensive assessments of current scientific, technical and socio-economic information worldwide about the risk of climate change caused by human activity, its potential environmental and...
Fourth Assessment Report
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
Climate Change 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , is the fourth in a series of reports intended to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, its potential effects, and options for...
.
In many cases the raw data which CRU had obtained from was subject to restrictions on redistribution: on 12 August 2009 CRU announced that they were seeking permission to waive these restrictions, and on 24 November 2009 the university stated that over 95% of the CRU climate data set had already been available for several years, with the remainder to be released when permissions were obtained. In a decision announced on 27 July 2011 the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) required release of raw data even though permissions had not been obtained or in one instance had been refused, and on 27 July 2011 CRU announced release of the raw instrumental data not already in the public domain, with the exception of Poland which was outside the area covered by the FOIA request.
A 2008 FOI request by David Holland for emails discussing work on the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report was refused by the university. In November 2009 he alleged that CRU emails posted online discussed deleting the emails he had requested: in January 2010 the Deputy Information Commissioner told a journalist that this indicated an offence under section 77 of the FOIA, but prosecution was time-barred by statute of limitations
Statute of limitations
A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated...
. Newspapers misrepresented this as a decision in relation to raw data, and the issue was discussed by the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee
Science and Technology Select Committee
The Science and Technology Select Committee is a select committee of the House of Commons in the Parliament of the United Kingdom.The original Science and Technology was abolished upon the creation of the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee on November 6, 2007...
inquiry, which found there had been a lack of openness. The ICO decision published on 7 July 2010 stated that this potential offence had not been investigated as it was time-barred. As Holland was content not to proceed with his complaint against the university, no further action was needed, but the ICO would "consider whether further action is appropriate to secure future compliance."
FOIA requests for raw climate data
From 1978 onwards, the Climatic Research UnitClimatic Research Unit
The Climatic Research Unit is a component of the University of East Anglia and is one of the leading institutions concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change....
developed its gridded CRUTEM
HadCRUT
HadCRUT is the dataset of monthly temperature records formed by combining the sea surface temperature records compiled by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the land surface temperature records compiled by the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia.The data is variance...
data set
Data set
A data set is a collection of data, usually presented in tabular form. Each column represents a particular variable. Each row corresponds to a given member of the data set in question. Its values for each of the variables, such as height and weight of an object or values of random numbers. Each...
of land air temperature anomalies based on instrumental temperature record
Instrumental temperature record
The instrumental temperature record shows fluctuations of the temperature of the global land surface and oceans. This data is collected from several thousand meteorological stations, Antarctic research stations and satellite observations of sea-surface temperature. Currently, the longest-running...
s held by around the world, often under formal or informal confidentiality agreements that restricted use of this raw data to academic purposes. Beginning in 1991, Phil Jones
Phil Jones
Philip D. Jones is a climatologist at the University of East Anglia, where he works as a Professor in the School of Environmental Sciences. Jones holds a BA in Environmental Sciences from the University of Lancaster, and an MSc and PhD from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne...
of CRU discussed data with Warwick Hughes (later of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition is an organisation based in New Zealand which has the aim of refuting what it believes are unfounded claims about anthropogenic global warming.-Beginnings:...
), and from 2002 onwards had requests for raw data from Stephen McIntyre
Stephen McIntyre
Stephen McIntyre is a Canadian mathematician, former minerals prospector, and semi-retired mining consultant who is best known as the founder and editor of Climate Audit, a blog devoted to the analysis and discussion of climate data...
for raw data relating to the hockey stick graph
Hockey stick controversy
The hockey stick controversy refers to debates over the technical correctness and implications for global warming of graphs showing reconstructed estimates of the temperature record of the past 1000 years...
as shown in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
Climate Change 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , is the fourth in a series of reports intended to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, its potential effects, and options for...
(AR4) of 2001. At first Jones met their requests, but increasingly felt that he was inundated with requests that he could not meet due to time or confidentiality constraints, and in 2005 began refusing requests. In that year the new UK Freedom of Information Act
Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is an Act of Parliament of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that creates a public "right of access" to information held by public authorities. It is the implementation of freedom of information legislation in the United Kingdom on a national level...
came into effect, and climate researchers discussed the scope and implications of FOIA requests which they saw as disrupting the time available for their work, and inappropriate for private emails.
Late in 2008, the university's FOI managers took advice from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) on exceptions allowing refusal of requests. Between 24 and 29 July 2009 the university received 58 FOI requests for raw data or details of the confidentiality agreements from McIntyre and his readers at the Climate Audit
Climate Audit
Climate Audit is a blog which was founded on 31 January 2005 by Steve Mcintyre.The New York Times has called it "a popular skeptics’ blog".The website has won the 2007 Best Science Blog award and was a runner up in the same category in 2008.-Founding:...
blog. McIntyre complained that data denied to him had been sent to Peter Webster at Georgia Tech University
Georgia Institute of Technology
The Georgia Institute of Technology is a public research university in Atlanta, Georgia, in the United States...
, who was working on a joint publication with Jones. On 12 August Nature News
Nature (journal)
Nature, first published on 4 November 1869, is ranked the world's most cited interdisciplinary scientific journal by the Science Edition of the 2010 Journal Citation Reports...
published a statement by Jones that he was working to release the raw data in a systematic way, and was writing to all the National Meteorological Organisations requesting their agreement to waive confidentiality. Jonathan A. Jones
Jonathan A. Jones
Jonathan A. Jones is a university lecturer in atomic and laser physics at Oxford University, and a fellow and tutor in physics at Brasenose College, Oxford...
of the University of Oxford and Don Keiller of Anglia Ruskin University
Anglia Ruskin University
Anglia Ruskin University is one of the largest universities in Eastern England, United Kingdom, with a total student population of around 30,000.-History:...
in Cambridge
Cambridge
The city of Cambridge is a university town and the administrative centre of the county of Cambridgeshire, England. It lies in East Anglia about north of London. Cambridge is at the heart of the high-technology centre known as Silicon Fen – a play on Silicon Valley and the fens surrounding the...
made FOIA requests for the data that Jones had sent to Webster. The requests were both refused by the UEA by 11 September 2009.
On 24 November 2009, four days after the start of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
Climatic Research Unit email controversy
The Climatic Research Unit email controversy began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia...
, the university stated that over 95% of the CRU climate data set had already been available for several years, and the remainder would be released when permissions were given.
Requests were sent by the Met Office
Met Office
The Met Office , is the United Kingdom's national weather service, and a trading fund of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills...
to National Meteorological Organisations for agreement to waive confidentiality on raw instrumental data, as CRU had announced on 12 August 2009. Some gave full or conditional agreement, others failed to respond, and the request was explicitly refused by Trinidad and Tobago
Trinidad and Tobago
Trinidad and Tobago officially the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago is an archipelagic state in the southern Caribbean, lying just off the coast of northeastern Venezuela and south of Grenada in the Lesser Antilles...
and Poland
Poland
Poland , officially the Republic of Poland , is a country in Central Europe bordered by Germany to the west; the Czech Republic and Slovakia to the south; Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania to the east; and the Baltic Sea and Kaliningrad Oblast, a Russian exclave, to the north...
. In discussions with the ICO about the FOIA requests which Jones and Keiller had made before the email controversy had begun, the university argued that the data was publicly available from the Met organisations, and the lack of agreement exempted the remaining data. In its decision released on 23 June 2011, the ICO stated that the data was not easily available and there was insufficient evidence that disclosure would have an adverse effect on international relations. The ICO required the university to release the data covered by the FOIA request within 35 calendar days. On 27 July 2011 CRU announced release of the raw instrumental data not already in the public domain, with the exception of Poland which was outside the area covered by the FOIA request. The data are available for download from Met Office website and from CRU. The university remained concerned "that the forced release of material from a source which has explicitly refused to give permission for release could have some damaging consequences for the UK in international research collaborations."
FOIA requests for emails discussing IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
In May 2008 David Holland, an electrical engineer from NorthamptonNorthampton
Northampton is a large market town and local government district in the East Midlands region of England. Situated about north-west of London and around south-east of Birmingham, Northampton lies on the River Nene and is the county town of Northamptonshire. The demonym of Northampton is...
, made a FOI request for all emails to and from Keith Briffa
Keith Briffa
Professor Keith R. Briffa is a climatologist employed since 1977 by the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, of which he is currently deputy director. In his professional work, he focuses on the climate change in late Holocene, with a special focus on northern portions of...
about the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
Climate Change 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , is the fourth in a series of reports intended to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, its potential effects, and options for...
(AR4); formal review exchanges had already been published. The University of East Anglia
University of East Anglia
The University of East Anglia is a public research university based in Norwich, United Kingdom. It was established in 1963, and is a founder-member of the 1994 Group of research-intensive universities.-History:...
(UEA) information policy and compliance manager (IPCM) refused the request.
Holland appealed to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) about the UEA's refusals of FOI requests he had made for emails to and from Briffa about the IPCC AR4 report. On 23 November 2009, after the start of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy
Climatic Research Unit email controversy
The Climatic Research Unit email controversy began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia...
, he wrote to the Commissioner explaining in detail the relevance of the alleged CRU emails to his case. In one of these sent in May 2008, Jones asked others to delete emails discussing AR4 with Briffa. ICO decisions are enforced under Section 50 by notices defining steps to be taken by the public authority within defined time limits, and failure to comply can be taken to court. In addition, Section 77 makes it an offence to intentionally destroy or conceal information which has been requested. In response to a Sunday Times
The Sunday Times
The Sunday Times is a British Sunday newspaper.The Sunday Times may also refer to:*The Sunday Times *The Sunday Times *The Sunday Times *The Sunday Times...
journalist who persistently asked why the ICO was not prosecuting under Section 77, Deputy Information Commissioner Graham Smith replied on 22 January 2010 that "The FOI Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information. Mr Holland's FOI requests were submitted in 2007/8, but it has only recently come to light that they were not dealt with in accordance with the Act. The legislation requires action within six months of the offence taking place, so by the time the action came to light the opportunity to consider a prosecution was long gone." The ICO was looking into other investigations time-barred by statute of limitations
Statute of limitations
A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated...
restrictions to see if a case could be made to change the relevant law. The journalist's report as published in The Times
The Times
The Times is a British daily national newspaper, first published in London in 1785 under the title The Daily Universal Register . The Times and its sister paper The Sunday Times are published by Times Newspapers Limited, a subsidiary since 1981 of News International...
on 28 January portrayed this as an ICO decision that the university "broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny" but the ICO "could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late." The university promptly wrote to the ICO objecting to the damaging statement having been made to a journalist without first consulting the university. It described the misrepresentation by the press and requested retraction or clarification of the alleged breaches. The ICO declined to retract, but clarified that its investigation under Section 50 had not been completed and no decision notice had been issued. It said that "The fact that the elements of a section 77 offence may have been found here, but cannot be acted on because of the elapsed time, is a very serious matter. The ICO is not resiling from its position on this", and that "Errors like this are frequently made in press reports and the ICO cannot be expected to correct them, particularly when the ICO has not itself referred to penalties or sanctions in its own statement."
In its submission to the Science and Technology Select Committee, the university denied allegations that it had refused to release raw data in breach of the FOI Act, and said that the Deputy Information Commissioner's comments had been incorrectly reported as referring to such data. In its inquiry report, the Science and Technology Select Committee criticised the ICO, which it said had made "a statement to the press that went beyond that which it could substantiate", and recommended that it should develop procedures to check its public comments, and "swiftly correct any mis-statements or misinterpretations of such statements". While there was prima facie
Prima facie
Prima facie is a Latin expression meaning on its first encounter, first blush, or at first sight. The literal translation would be "at first face", from the feminine form of primus and facies , both in the ablative case. It is used in modern legal English to signify that on first examination, a...
evidence of a breach of Section 77 of the FOI Act, it would "be premature, without a thorough investigation affording each party the opportunity to make representations, to conclude that UEA was in breach of the Act." It called for a full investigation by the Muir Russell inquiry or by the Information Commissioner to resolve this issue, and accepted that the six month statute of limitations restriction was insufficient and should be reviewed. On the general issue of information requests, the committee said that information not covered by the exclusions provided by the FOIA should have been disclosed, and "in future information, including data and methodology, should be published proactively on the internet wherever possible." It blamed the university for mishandling Freedom of Information requests, and said it had “found ways to support the culture at CRU of resisting disclosure of information to climate change sceptics”.
The ICO decision on Holland's requests published on 7 July 2010 concluded that the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) applied rather than the equivalent FOIA, and the university had failed to provide responses within the correct time, but as Holland was content not to proceed with his complaint, no further action was needed. Regarding the question of whether there had been a breach of section 77 of the FOIA or its equivalent in the EIR, the ICO stated "Although the emails referred to above indicated prime facie evidence of an offence, the Commissioner was unable to investigate because six months had passed since the potential offence was committed, a constraint placed on the legislation by the Magistrates Court Act 1980." On the more general issue of emails suggesting that attempts to circumvent the legislation had been considered, and a lack of openness, the ICO would "now consider whether further action is appropriate to secure future compliance." In an opinion piece, Edward Acton
Edward Acton (academic)
The Hon Edward David Joseph Lyon-Dalberg-Acton FRHistS is a British academic and current Vice-Chancellor of the University of East Anglia....
, Vice-Chancellor of the UEA, commended legislation in the US where "the FOI distinguishes between recorded factual material necessary to validate research findings, which must be disclosed, and ‘preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, plans for future research, peer reviews [and] communications with colleagues’, which are exempted."