[REDACTED] Government Hides Details of Minister's Meeting with Fracking Industry

authordefault
on

By Ruth Hayhurst for Drill orย Drop

Most of the notes about a recent meeting between a minister and the shale gas industry have been redacted โ€œin the public interestโ€ or because they contained confidential information, a government department hasย said.

Information about the meeting, first publicly referred to during a parliamentary debate, was released following a Freedom of Informationย request.

But in its response, the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) published only the agenda and the first eight lines of the two-plus pages of meeting notes. Even the second half of the notes of the ministerโ€™s presentations was blanked out โ€œin the public interestโ€. (Redacted notes of industry meeting with Claire Perryย (pdf))

BEIS also said there was no list of the industry representatives attending theย meeting.

The meeting was held at lunchtime on 21 May 2018. Later that day, Ms Perry and the then housing minister, Dominic Raab appeared before aย committeeย of MPs to answer questions on proposals to change planning rules for shaleย gas.

The week before, on 17 May 2018, the business and local government secretaries had releasedย written ministerial statementsย about the changes. These proposed to classify non-fracking shale gas proposals as permitted development, avoiding the need for planning applications. Shale gas production schemes would become nationally-significant infrastructure projects to be decided by a Secretary ofย State.

Ms Perryโ€™s meeting came to light last month when she said in aย debateย that sheโ€™d had โ€œa very effective shale industryย roundtableโ€.

This was followed up with the FOI request by Richard Bales, who lives in Ryedale, where Third Energy is still waiting to hear whether it has permission to frack at well at Kirbyย Misperton.

Mr Balesย said:

โ€œI was intrigued by Claire Perryโ€™s so-pleased reference in Parliament to her โ€˜Shale Gas Round Tableโ€™ with Industry Operators, I made polite FOI enquiry as to what thisย was.

โ€œI didnโ€™t expect much, which is exactly what I got. They admit there was a meeting, but nobody has a list of attendees and wonโ€™t tell me what wasย discussed.โ€

Mr Bales toldย DrillOrDrop:

โ€œThere is an undisguised arrogance and disdain for the community evident in the Government position on shale gas and the succession of unilateral decisions that have been taken. Operators clearly have open access to lobby Ministers and their departments, whereas the public have little representation, particularly when very few MPs appear willing to place their constituents wishes ahead of their own careerย prospects.โ€

BEIS said withholding some of the information from the meeting notes was in the publicย interest.

It said it had used exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act on disclosure of material relating to the formulation of governmentย policy.

In its response to Mr Bales, BEISย said:

โ€œWhilst there is a public interest in favour of disclosing information relating to the Governmentโ€™s policy, we consider that releasing this information also poses a risk to the protection of the decision-making process and the Governmentโ€™s preparation of theย review.

โ€œThere is a public interest in ensuring that government has a safe space to develop ideas, debate live issues, and reach decisions away from external interference and distraction, as well as ensuring that the UK can obtain the best possible outcome for our policy regarding Shale Gasย extraction.

โ€œWe judge that disclosing this information would inhibit the frankness of future discussions, inhibit policy formulation and development, which would not be in the public interest. In our view, taking account of these factors, there is a strong public interest in withholdingย information.โ€

BEIS also said it had used an exemption under the act on providing confidential information. On these details, BEIS said no public interest test wasย required.


Image: The meeting agenda released after an FOIย request

Mr Balesย said:

โ€œThe response is clumsy, brutal and insensitive and makes no attempt to disguise the gulf which now exists between the Government and its public. It implies that transparency of decision-making is primarily to be discouraged and that the public are to be excluded from the decision-making process for their own good. It cannot beย accepted.โ€

Internalย review

He has asked BEIS to carry out an internal review of its decision. He said it was โ€œinconceivableโ€ that a minister would hold a scheduled meeting with a formal agenda and attended by senior officials without a record being kept ofย attendees.

โ€œSecurity alone should dictate that attendees would sign-in, with prior notification of expected attendance, to ensure that participation is limited to those with a valid invitation or reason to be there. I would suggest that insufficient attempts have been made to identify and disclose the requestedย information.โ€

He also challenged BEISโ€™s use of theย exemptions.

โ€œThe argument used is that the publicโ€™s interest in information being disclosed for reasons of transparency and understanding of Government policy is in itself an impediment to the decision makingย process.

โ€œThe implication is therefore that no visibility of the decision-making process is to be allowed and that the public interest in disclosure of relevant Government process is to be continuallyย denied.โ€

Mr Bales said this was not intention of the exemption in the Act. He also described the exemption on confidential information as โ€œa catch-all response that is only justifiable if all such notes relate to input from third parties to whom disclosure would represent a breach ofย confidenceโ€.

Heย said:

โ€œOne wonders what information might have been shared at the Round Table that was not disclosed by the WMS [Written Ministerial Statement] or in the later testimony to the Committee, at which Claire Perry made several references to Governmentโ€™s intention to โ€˜work to eliminateย distrustโ€™.

DrillOrDrop asked BEIS to respond to these arguments. A spokespersonย said:

โ€œAs the review is ongoing we will not be commenting on this at this time. More information will be available once the review isย complete.โ€

Last month, the governmentย advertisedย for a shale gas commissioner to โ€œfacilitate communicationโ€ with residents in frackingย areas.

The role aimedย to:

โ€œimprove local understanding of shale gas operations by directing concerned local parties to relevant and impartial fact basedย informationโ€.

There is a growing list of official documents on UK shale gas development that have been redacted, unpublished orย delayed.

Earlier this month, a government report revealing that shale gas extraction increased air pollution was finallyย publishedย three years after its submission. Also this month, anti-fracking campaigners criticised the government forย droppingย questions about shale gas from a quarterly public attitudesย survey.

In February 2018, itย emergedย that another report, which was not published, had scaled back estimates on the number of UK unconventional oil and gas sites in the 2020s. (DrillOrDropย report)

In July 2015, the government finallyย releasedย a full version of the previously redacted report on the impacts of fracking in rural areas after an instruction from the Informationย Commissioner.

Main image:ย DrillorDrop

authordefault

Related Posts

on

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.
on

Ahead of a city council vote, Resource Works launched an influence campaign with stock submissions for restaurant owners, hospitality workers, and residents.

Ahead of a city council vote, Resource Works launched an influence campaign with stock submissions for restaurant owners, hospitality workers, and residents.
on

Ahead of the November 29 election, dairy producers tell Irish government to step off the โ€œtreadmillโ€ of unsustainable milk production โ€“ and share a more holistic vision.

Ahead of the November 29 election, dairy producers tell Irish government to step off the โ€œtreadmillโ€ of unsustainable milk production โ€“ and share a more holistic vision.
on

The head of the CO2 Coalition tells DeSmog that Wright agrees carbon dioxide is โ€œnot the demon molecule, itโ€™s the miracle molecule.โ€

The head of the CO2 Coalition tells DeSmog that Wright agrees carbon dioxide is โ€œnot the demon molecule, itโ€™s the miracle molecule.โ€