FOI/202500490770 · FOI · partially withheld
Correspondence and meeting records between the Chief Economist Directorate and Scotonomics: FOI release
Information requested
The following information:
For the period 30th January 2025 - date, please provide:
(1.) All correspondence between the Chief Economist Directorate of the Scottish Government and William Thomson or Kairin van Sweeden, both of Scotonomics. (2.) Any briefing materials, notes, or minutes relating to meetings (in person or virtual) involving the Chief Economist Directorate and William Thomson or Kairin van Sweeden.
Response
I enclose a copy of most of the information you requested. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some of the information you have requested because an exemption under section s.38(1)(b) (personal information) of FOISA applies. The personal information of officials below the Senior Civil Service has been withheld. In addition personal phone numbers and personal exchanges have also been withheld.
This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption.
About FOI
The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.
Detected exemption language
While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some of the information you have requested because an exemption under section s.38(1)(b) (personal information) of FOISA applies. This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption.