date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:39:00 +0100 from: "Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\)" subject: RE: FW: Environmental Information Regulations [FOI_09-44; to: "Jones Philip Prof \(ENV\)" , "Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\)" Phil/Michael, I can understand your reluctance to deal with Mr. McIntyre's request but we do need to have justifiable grounds for claiming an exception under the EIR in order to do so... To address your point Michael, I think that there might be a difference seen between personal correspondence between academics and actual data which has a life/role outside that correspondence. In regards the public interest test that we have to address, once again, I would think that whilst there is a good argument for protecting the ability of academics to communicate freely and openly, the underlying data that may comprise part of that communication might well fall into another category. One only has to look at the JISC funded projects on national scientific data repositories and exchange to see that there appears to be a perception in the academic community that the exchange & re-use of data is a good thing. We also have to remember that, much like FOIA, the exception regarding 'confidentiality' is in relation to a person providing the information to the organisation - it does not touch upon correspondence from the organisation That is covered either by 'internal communications' exception, or as in the other case with the IPCC, an 'adverse effect' on international relations (which I believe to be entirely justifiable) As you are both quite busy over the next couple of weeks, I would be happy to discuss this further w/c 13 July with you, Michael and verify our approach the following week prior to the deadline of 24 July. Cheers,. Dave ______________________________________________________________________________________ From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 9:52 AM To: Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD); Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) Subject: RE: FW: Environmental Information Regulations [FOI_09-44; EIR_09-03] Michael, Dave, I'm away part of next week (July 7-9 inclusive) and also not here at all the following week (July 13-17). I'm here all the week of July 20-24, with the exception of the Friday (24th) afternoon. Cheers Phil At 17:36 26/06/2009, Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\) wrote: Dave et al, As we are testing EIR with the other climate audit org request relating to communications with other academic colleagues, I think that we would weaken that case if we supplied the information in this case. So I would suggest that we decline this one (at the very end of the time period), with one of the valid reasons that you, Jonathan and I disucssed, and let him go through appeal. Happy to discuss further (but not for a couple of weeks since my diary is pretty full next week and the week after). Regards Michael Michael McGarvie Director of Faculty Administration Faculty of Science Room 0.22B University of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJ tel: 01603 593229 fax: 01603 593045 m.mcgarvie@uea.ac.uk _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 3:53 PM To: Jones Philip Prof (ENV); Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) Cc: Osborn Timothy Dr (ENV) Subject: RE: FW: Environmental Information Regulations [FOI_09-44; EIR_09-03] Phil [et al], The fact that information is within an email that you consider 'personal' does not render the information itself personal. In order to not disclose information under EIR, we need to have a valid exception, and then also pass a public interest test that shows that the public interest is better served by non-disclosure than disclosure. I will have a think about what exceptions are available to us, but, at this moment I am having difficulty making a case for any that would apply here. The other issue is passing the public interest test - we would, I presume be relying on some sort of public interest in preserving the confidentiality of communications between academic colleagues but there is no guarantee that the ICO would uphold this. I will get back to you next week on this one.... Cheers, Dave _________________________________________________________________________ From: Phil Jones [[1] mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk] Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 3:16 PM To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB); Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) Cc: Osborn Timothy Dr (ENV) Subject: Re: FW: Environmental Information Regulations [FOI_09-44; EIR_09-03] Dave, I sent some of the station data to a Jun Jian at Georgia Tech on 15 Jan 2009. I see now that Peter Webster was a recipient on the email. I also see from looking at Climate Audit that this request results from Peter saying on CA that he's not had any difficulty getting data from CRU (see what he said below on June 24). I regard this as a personal email between me and this group at Georgia Tech. So, McIntyre has no right to request the data in a personal email. I only sent a small part of the dataset anyway. They asked for a specific set and said what they were going to do with the data. Cheers Phil Steve, We have asked Phil Jones for data so that we could compare the synthesized surface temperature with actual station data. Jones has provided everything that we have asked for. This is for our study of the 1930/40 climate bump that is ongoing. Alas, these things take time. But my experience has been quite different to yours. As you know, I have often complained that the right wing and the left wing (the absolutists of AGHW and those who do not have a bar of it) have forced us into corners in which we are not comfortable. If there is to be reasonable resolution of the climate GWH issues and the fidelity of data (both critical and reasonable questions?) I think that the questions and opinions can't be shouted from one corner or the other. BTW, we have a Science article coming out next week about the changes in form of El Nino (GHW or natural variability: no idea! But changes there are) and its impact on NATL hurricanes. Not sure if it will be of interest to C-A as it does not raise the question of GW. But the data set is short........ best regards Peter W At 13:57 26/06/2009, Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\) wrote: Gents, A request from Mr. McIntyre under EIR that arrived today. Response due by 24 July. I have acknowledged the request and confirmed that we will be handling this under EIR. Any concerns with this request? Any need for clarification? Cheers, Dave _________________________________________________________________________ From: Steve McIntyre [ [2]mailto:stephen.mcintyre@utoronto.ca] Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 4:45 AM To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) Subject: Environmental Information Regulations Dear Mr Palmer, Pursuant to the Environmental Information Regulations, I hereby request a copy of any digital version of the CRUTEM station data set that has been sent from CRU to Peter Webster and/or any other person at Georgia Tech between January 1, 2007 and Jun 25, 2009. Thank you for your attention, Stephen McIntyre Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------