Tuesday, April 10, 2012


date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:07:17 +0100
from: "Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\)" <David.PalmeratXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: RE: Freedom of Information Act request (FOI_08-23)
to: "Tim Osborn" <t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Briffa Keith Prof \(ENV\)" <K.BriffaatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\)" <M.McgarvieatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Jones Philip Prof \(ENV\)" <P.JonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

As I have not heard anything further from you subsequent to Tim's email
below, I will be doing the following:

A. Will send response to FOI_O8-23 as drafted & circulated

B. Will acknowledge and treat Mr. Holland's letter of 27 May as a
separate request. I have acknowledged the request as such, and will
draft a response regarding the referral of some elements of his request
to the IPCC and answering the other sections. Who would be my contact
with the IPCC to which I could forward this request?

Cheers, Dave

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Osborn [mailto:t.osborn@uea.ac.uk]
>Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 1:11 PM
>To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB); Briffa Keith Prof (ENV); Mcgarvie
>Michael Mr (ACAD); Jones Philip Prof (ENV)
>Subject: RE: Freedom of Information Act request (FOI_08-23)
>Dear Dave,
>I've had a look through this initial draft and it sounds fine. Keith
>and I will read it in more detail, hopefully this afternoon, with
>specific reference to the public interest section.
>Can we treat Holland's follow-up letter as a separate request? As
>Phil mentioned, Caspar Ammann can be rather slow at replying, so we
>haven't yet heard whether any emails that he sent us were sent in
>confidence on his part. Can we respond to the initial FOI request,
>and leave the follow-up till we hear back from Ammann?
>Best regards
>At 17:38 27/05/2008, Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\) wrote:
>>An initial draft of a response to Mr. Holland based on the
>>limit' and s.41, Information provided in confidence. In
>particular, your
>>input on the public interest in not disclosing the correspondence
>>received by the University in this matter would be appreciated.
>>This is a first draft so open to comment; the bits about
>right of appeal
>>are mandated by the Lord Chancellor's Code of Practice.
>>Cheers, Dave
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Keith Briffa [mailto:k.briffa@uea.ac.uk]
>> >Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 5:07 PM
>> >To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB); Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD); Osborn
>> >Timothy Dr (ENV); Jones Philip Prof (ENV)
>> >Subject: Re: Freedom of Information Act request (FOI_08-23)
>> >
>> >Hi Dave
>> >Holland acknowledged receipt - and said he would read my
>letter over
>> >last weekend. I have heard nothing since. I am happy for you to send
>> >the query but I suspect he will still pursue the original request. I
>> >would prefer that we simply answer that his request is
>unreasonable -
>> >and decline. We could also state that virtually all Chapter
>6 authors
>> >have declined/prohibited the release o their correspondence. This is
>> >a matter a principal as far as I see it and we should not fall into
>> >the trap of claiming time constraint, which would imply likely
>> >compliance with further , less demanding requests.
>> >cheers
>> >Keirth
>> >
>> >At 16:51 21/05/2008, Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\) wrote:
>> >>Gents,
>> >>Yesterday was 2 weeks to the deadline on this matter. (3 June)
>> >>
>> >>Keith - any response to your letter as yet from Mr. Holland?
>> >>
>> >>We had discussed inquiring whether this response would satisfy Mr.
>> >>Holland but I'm not sure whether we had decided who was
>going to make
>> >>the approach to Mr. Holland. I am happy to do something
>> >along the lines
>> >>of ....
>> >>"I understand that Prof. Briffa has made a response to your
>> >letter of 31
>> >>March. Does this in any way alter the scope of your request
>> >under this
>> >>Act or in fact effect your desire to continue with this request?"
>> >>Pretty clear what our 'intention' is but I feel the
>requester is not
>> >>going to be any more upset with us for having asked the
>> >question... Your
>> >>opinions?
>> >>
>> >>Will be working on draft response to share with you shortly
>> >>
>> >>Cheers, Dave
>> >>
>> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: Keith Briffa [mailto:k.briffa@uea.ac.uk]
>> >> >Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 1:49 PM
>> >> >To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB); Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD); Osborn
>> >> >Timothy Dr (ENV); Jones Philip Prof (ENV)
>> >> >Subject:
>> >> >
>> >> >Dave, Michael, Tim and Phil
>> >> >I have now considered all your thoughtful and helpful
>> >comments and on
>> >> >the basis of them have decided to send the attached response to
>> >> >Holland. Unless I hear anything to the contrary from you
>, I intend
>> >> >to send this letter as a pdf response by email to
>Holland tomorrow
>> >> >morning. I believe that my responses offer some personal comments
>> >> >while protecting the confidentiality of author interactions. By
>> >> >providing this reply I hope that it will be considered that
>> >I did not
>> >> >dismiss Holland's questions out of hand. I do not
>believe that this
>> >> >letter compromises or undermines the IPCC reporting
>process in any
>> >> >way and it clearly indicates that further correspondence
>will not be
>> >> >entered into on the matter. Hope you all agree.
>> >> >thanks again
>> >> >Keith
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >Professor Keith Briffa,
>> >> >Climatic Research Unit
>> >> >University of East Anglia
>> >> >Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>> >> >
>> >> >Phone: +44-1603-593909
>> >> >Fax: +44-1603-507784
>> >> >
>> >> >http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/
>> >> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Professor Keith Briffa,
>> >Climatic Research Unit
>> >University of East Anglia
>> >Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>> >
>> >Phone: +44-1603-593909
>> >Fax: +44-1603-507784
>> >
>> >http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/
>> >
>> >
>Dr Timothy J Osborn, Academic Fellow
>Climatic Research Unit
>School of Environmental Sciences
>University of East Anglia
>Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
>e-mail: t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk
>phone: +44 1603 592089
>fax: +44 1603 507784
>web: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/
>sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm

No comments:

Post a Comment