· FOI/EIR · clarification
Correspondence regarding the Isle of Ulva estate: EIR release
Information requested
All correspondence between the Scottish Government and the North West Mull Community Woodland Company regarding the proposed purchase of the Isle of Ulva Estate.
On the 10 May 2018 I sought clarification of the request and you advised that you would like all correspondence from October 2 2017, until the present date. You also advised through a separate email that you would like a copy of FOI/17/02207 which covered the period before 2 October 2017.
As the information you have requested is 'environmental information' for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.
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, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.
Response
I enclose a copy of all of the information you requested.
To comply with Data Protection requirements, we have redacted personal information (signatures, phone numbers etc) from within the documents that have been released.
Detected exemption language
We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA. 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, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes.