EIR - Vehicles for Ukraine [Dec 2023]

Your request 

1. Does the city pay for the utilisation of the vehicles purchased under the ULEZ scrappage scheme?

• If so what company and how much?
• Please provide copies of the related contracts, tender documentation, and correspondence. 

2. Please provide all internal correspondence, communications, and documents related to a recent request from volunteer groups to send these vehicles to Ukraine instead of being scrapped.
3. Please provide a step-by-step guide outlining how the ULEZ scrappage scheme process is envisioned. Specifically:

• Where is the person supposed to physically bring the car?
• Where is the car stored and for how long?
• Who pays for the storage and how much?
• How does the car make its way to a utilisation site?
• How does the utilisation site benefit from participation in the scheme?

Our response

The ULEZ scrappage scheme is administered by Transport for London (TfL) and provides grant payments to eligible London residents, London-registered sole traders, and businesses and charities operating in London to help them scrap their older, more polluting vehicles.

Under the terms of the scheme, successful applicants must scrap their vehicle at an Authorised Treatment Facility (ATF). The ATF issues a Certificate of Destruction that the applicant must then provide to Transport for London (TfL) as evidence that the vehicle has been scrapped. Once the applicant has provided the Certificate of Destruction, TfL will issue a grant payment (as a cheque) to the applicant. TfL only pays the scrappage applicant, it does not pay the ATFs or any other third party organisations.

More information on the process is available on the TfL website: ULEZ car and motorcycle scrappage scheme - Transport for London (tfl.gov.uk)

Please see the attached PDF for the documents the GLA holds within scope of this request.

I can confirm that the GLA holds information in relation to the second part of your request. We consider that this information falls under the exception to disclose at:

• Regulation 12(4)(e) - The request involves the disclosure of internal communications
• Regulation 12(5)(a) - International relations, defence, national security, public safety

Regulation 12(4)(e) applies to communications explicitly whereby GLA officials have engaged in free and frank discussions on matters pertaining to sending vehicles which do not meet the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) standards to Ukraine. The final position has not yet been determined and as such there are still further stages to the discussions that are yet to complete. The exception is engaged in order to protect the necessary space to explore ideas in private against the backdrop of a project which is under great public, media and political scrutiny.

Regulation 12(5)(a) applies to the disclosure of information which would adversely affect international relations, defence, national security or public safety. In this instance refusal is on the grounds that disclosure would adversely effect international relations.

The scope of the non-disclosure exception is broad in scope, in this instance it is to protect UK policy and strategic positioning regarding other states or international organisations and the key factors affecting harm are the content of the information, the trust and confidence other states and international organisations have in the UK, the timing of the request, and the broader effects of any disclosure.

Regulation 12 (4)(e) and Regulation 12(5)(a) constitute as qualified exemptions from our duty to disclose information under the EIR, and consideration must be given as to whether the public interest favouring disclosure of the information covered by this exemption outweighs the public interest considerations favouring maintaining the exemption and withholding the information.

The GLA acknowledges that there is a public interest in transparency in relation to planning and development matters, disclosure would enable the local community to understand more fully the decision-making process and effective decision making should be informed by engaging with the public and key stakeholders; however, this engagement needs to be structured to be effective. Release of this information at this time would divert attention and resources away from the task at hand and towards responding to external thoughts whilst discussions are still ongoing. This in turn would also be likely to have an adverse effect on the GLA’s ability to engage in free-flowing and honest exchanges of views in the future as it is likely that officials would become reluctant to explore all options.

It is also accepted that there is a public interest in a greater understanding of the United Kingdom's (UK) foreign relations and the information could also provide the public with a better understanding of Britain's conduct overseas. There is also a public interest in promoting accountability and transparency by public authorities on matters relating to the UK. However, we do not consider it within the public interest to disclose information which would be prejudicial to the current relationship between London, the UK and any other State and reduce co-operation between states in future.

Please see our answer to Question 1 regarding how the ULEZ scrappage scheme operates.