...have been turned down by the DCSF has finally emerged.
As Maire says, it seems to be OK to suggest false things about home educators, and to allow these misrepresentations to be propagated in the main stream media, but when someone explains how this is the case, or parodies the report and a public figure, it is deemed harrassment and cause for censor.
Surely what's sauce for the goose etc, and shouldn't this rightfully mean that the Home Education Review should be withdrawn?
On the other hand, for a plea that FOIs should rightfully be answered, please read comments below.
Related posts:
Renegade Parent
Bishop Hill
4 comments:
The s38 guidance that DCSF seek to invoke looks like a non-starter.
The guidance from the ICO says:
"Risks to mental health may be more difficult to judge. However, it would be a mistake to equate danger to mental health with a risk of distress and the Commissioner considers that the endangerment of mental health implies that disclosure might lead to or exacerbate an existing mental illness or psychological disorder."
There is no evidence of Badman having mental health problems or of any danger to his physical health. No evidence is presented of harassment, only of ridicule.
I would say the ICO will throw this out, but if there is info being withheld someone needs to speak to them about timescales. ICO complaints usually take over a year, but they will speed things up if it's urgent.
Yes I agree that all the Fois refused on these grounds need to go to the information commissioner.
This one is a total joke, how could he be fit to head a review, especially one where the data was knowingly misused and then be too fragile to take a bit of satirical criticism. Ludicrous.
You left out the animation they cited as 'vilification' created by a child and posted on YouTube. These people are completely desperate!
Lol...yeah, I couldn't bring myself to cite it! It was just too ridiculous!
Post a Comment