HomeSchooler.org.uk

What a surprise! The internal review has decided that the DCSF made
the right decision not to release B'ham's response to Badman. What a
pile of garbage. The only reason I can see to keep it secret is
because B'ham told a load of bare-faced lies and don't want to be
caught out:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ehe_review_by_graham_badman#incomi...

"The Department has now completed its internal review process and has
carried out a thorough review of the case, chaired by a senior officer
who was not involved with the original request. The review
reconsidered carefully the public interest balance but decided to
uphold the original decision not to disclose the information
concerned, the reasons set out in the email reply of 1 May 2009
remaining valid. In particular the following points were noted:

Local authorities, including Birmingham, were under no obligation to
provide us with responses to the questionnaire. Were we to release
they might not be willing to provide us with the information in the
future and our ability to understand the real picture as experienced
by home-educated children and the parents and professionals supporting
them would be greatly reduced. Future policy-making would be based on
an incomplete understanding of actual practice, and its effectiveness
would be greatly reduced.

The relationship between the Department and local authorities is based
on trust and the ability to have a frank dialogue about important
issues. These voluntary responses are part of that dialogue and whilst
the majority of them are positive in nature, we believe that releasing
them could result in local authorities, including Birmingham, feeling
that this had broken the trust that they have with the department.

This response is one of a number of pieces of information which may
inform the development of policy proposals. The release of the
information, prior to consideration by Ministers, would not further
public understanding of the policy area, but could in fact confuse
when taken out of context. It could have the effect of closing off
future options for Ministers, should they decide they wish to make
further provision in this area.

The publication of this information in whole or in part will be seen
(however wrongly) as a precedent in other cases, and this is likely
seriously to inhibit the free and frank provision of advice with the
consequences that future independent reviews will be unable to fulfil
their original purpose and secure open and full participation of
relevant agencies and their staff."