FOI/202600514231 · FOI · partially withheld
Documentation regarding China: FOI release
Information requested
1.Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government and seen by John Swinney and/or his office, which is about Donald Trump, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from meetings, briefings, analysis, from the last two weeks?
2. Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government and seen by John Swinney and/or his office, which is about China, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from meetings, briefings, analysis, from the last two weeks?
Response
1.Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government and seen by John Swinney and/or his office, which is about Donald Trump, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from meetings, briefings, analysis, from the last two weeks?
While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance the Scottish Government does not have [some of] the information you have requested. The reasons why we don't have the information are explained below. This is a formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested.
2. Could you supply all documentation held by the Scottish Government and seen by John Swinney and/or his office, which is about China, including correspondence sent and received (including internal), minutes/notes from meetings, briefings, analysis, from the last two weeks?
I enclose a copy of most of the information you requested at annex A.
s.38(1)(b) (personal information
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(s) under section(s) s.38(1)(b) (personal information) of FOISA applies to that information because it is personal data of a third party, ie names/contact details of individuals, and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption.
32(1)(a)[(i)/(ii)] of FOISA (international relations)
An exemption under section 32(1)(a)[(i)/(ii)] of FOISA (international relations) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially relations between the United Kingdom and the Chinese Government. The effective conduct of international relations depends upon maintaining trust and confidence between the UK Government and other States. In this case, the information about Scotland China relations was given to the Scottish Government on the understanding that it would be treated as being in confidence. If the Scottish Government does not respect this confidence, the UK Government’s relations with other States and its ability to protect and promote UK interests will be substantially prejudiced. States such as Chinese Government are likely to be more reluctant to share sensitive information with Scotland or other parts of the United Kingdom in future, which would reduce both the frequency and openness of communications with the UK.
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. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in ensuring that the UK Government is able to maintain good relations with other States, in order to protect and promote UK interests abroad. There can be no public interest in jeopardising those relations by the Scottish Government disclosing confidential information or information which another State has specifically asked us to withhold.
30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice)
An exemption under section 30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to Ministers and other officials before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice on the decision to not allow Ming Yang to invest in Scotland will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future, particularly because these discussions relate to a sensitive or controversial issue such as Ming Yang.
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. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to Ministers and other officials, as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government’s policy position on the decision to not allow Ming Yang to invest in Scotland, until the Government as a whole can adopt a decision that is sound and likely to be effective. This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that good decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers and officials, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process, which would not be in the public interest.
Section 30(b)(ii) – free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation
An exemption under sectionn 30(b)(ii) of FOISA (free and frank exchange of views) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation. This exemption recognises the need for Ministers/officials to have a private space within which to discuss issues and options with external stakeholders before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of these discussions with Ming Yang on the UK decision will substantially inhibit such discussions in the future, because these stakeholders will be reluctant to provide their views fully and frankly if they believe that those views are likely to be made public, particularly while [these discussions are still ongoing and decisions have not been taken, and/or these discussions relate to a sensitive or controversial issue such as Ming Yang’s investment into Scotland.
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. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing Ministers and officials a private space within which to communicate with appropriate external stakeholders as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government’s policy position on Ming Yang investing in Scotland and the decisions surrounding that , until the Government as a whole can adopt a policy/decision that is sound and likely to be effective. This private space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, so that good decisions can be taken based on fully informed advice and evidence, such as that provided by Ming Yang. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between the Scottish Government and these stakeholders, which in turn will undermine the quality of the policy/decision making process, which would not be in the public interest. There is also an important public interest in avoiding the loss of stakeholder confidence in cases where they thought they were providing comments in confidence, which would be inevitable if an individual’s contribution was released against their wishes.
Section 33(1)(b) of FOISA (commercial interests)
An exemption under section 33(1)(b) of FOISA (commercial interests) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure of this particular information would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially the commercial interests of Ardersier Quantum, Ming Yang and Haventus disclosing this information would be likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the companies concerned. The information relates to sensitive investment positions, future funding decisions and ongoing commercial discussions, and releasing it could undermine their ability to operate and negotiate effectively.
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. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open and transparent government, and to help account for the expenditure of public money. However, there is a greater public interest in protecting the commercial interests of companies which enter into, Scottish Government contracts, to ensure that we are always able to obtain the best value for public money.
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
This is a formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested. s.38(1)(b) (personal information 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(s) under section(s) s.38(1)(b) (personal information) of FOISA applies to that information because it is personal data of a third party, ie names/contact details of individuals, and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. 32(1)(a)[(i)/(ii)] of FOISA (international relations) An exemption under section 32(1)(a)[(i)/(ii)] of FOISA (international relations) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially relations between the United Kingdom and the Chinese Government.