Key information
Request reference number: MGLA060922-8806
Date of response:
Summary of request
Your request
Please could you tell me if the GLA is providing grant funding to Peabody for social
housing in Sun Wharf, Deptford (SE8 3DZ) (Lewisham Council Ref: DC 20/118229)?
If so, could you advise of any deadlines that have been set by the GLA in respect of the use of this grant funding?
Could you also provide all correspondence between the GLA and Peabody
relating to this grant funding?
Our response
I can confirm that the GLA has awarded grant funding for affordable homes at the Sun Wharf development in Deptford.
The funding allocation is dependent on the following milestones being met:
- Planning Committee by 1 September 2022
- Detailed planning permission achieved by 7 September 2022
- End of Judicial Review period by 7 September 2022
- Contractor appointment by 21 September 2022
- Start on Site by 3 January 2023
- Completion by 3 January 2025
If these milestones are not met the GLA reserve the right to withdraw funding allocation. Any changes to these milestones require the GLA’s approval. In addition, as the funding allocation has been made from the Mayor’s Affordable Housing 16-23 programme, Start on Site must be achieved, claimed and approved before1 April 2023. If Start on Site moves beyond this date the GLA will be unable to fund the scheme under Affordable Housing 16-23 programme, and the funding will be withdrawn.
Unfortunately, we are unable to provide you with a copy of provide all correspondence between the GLA and Peabody relating to this grant funding. This part of your request falls under the exception to disclose because it is considered to be ‘manifestly unreasonable’ under regulation 12(4)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulation (EIR). This provision allows public authorities to refuse requests which are obviously or clearly unreasonable or when the estimated cost of compliance is too great.
In reaching this decision we have considered the views of the Upper (Information Rights) Tribunal in ‘Craven v IC & DECCC [2012] UKUT442 (AAC)’ in respect of the EIR exception under regulation 12(4)(b), the formal guidance issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office, along with Decision Notices regarding this EIR exception, such as FS50585926, amongst others, which all acknowledge that public authorities may use the fees regulations as the basis of considering the cost and time of complying with a request.
An initial search of the email account of one officer has yielded approximately 370 emails potentially within scope of your request, many of which also include attachments. We expect the results to increase significantly as we expand the searches over other accounts within the Housing and Land Directorate.
In this instance, we have decided this request falls within the parameters of regulation 12(4)(b) and is manifestly unreasonable because of the considerable amount of time that would be required to collate and review the information. The nature of the requested information necessitates it be reviewed initially by members of staff within our Housing and Land Directorate who are experienced with the background of the development and separating it from other projects within the programme. This would place an unacceptable burden on their limited resources and constitute an unreasonable distraction from normal work.
A public authority can only withhold information if the public interest in maintaining the
exception outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. We are mindful of the general public interest in transparency and accountability, and of the presumption in favour of disclosure and to read exceptions restrictively.
Some of the information we have identified would likely engage one or more of the disclosure exception (exemption) provisions of the EIR. We would consequentially have to spend a considerable amount of time reviewing each piece of information individually and consulting with third parties to consider whether or not it would be
exempt from disclosure.
The time and resources required to review this information would be unreasonable given the potential for it to remain exempt information. Similarly, a large volume
of information caught by this request is administrative in nature to the development.
Where this information might be suitable for release under the EIR, the time and resources required to review this information, given it cannot be easily separated from the exempt information, would also be unreasonable given the limited benefit to the public debate on this matter.
On balance therefore, it is our view that the public interest in maintaining the exception in regulation 12(4)(b) outweighs the public interest in disclosure. I understand this response may cause frustration, but it aims to ensure, as recognised in the guidance, that our responsibilities under the Act do not distract from our other statutory functions as a public authority. When refusing a request for environmental information under regulation 12(4)(b) on the grounds of cost, public authorities are required to provide advice and assistance and explaining how a request may be refined. However, your current request has a particularly broad time frame and is not limited to any particular subject matter regarding the development.
You may wish to consider reducing the scope of your request by:
- limiting it to a recent time period for emails, for example, over a six month period
- limiting it to emails that have been sent between the GLA Housing and Land Directorate and Peabody only
- identifying particular themes or subjects for the correspondence that we can use to filter the email correspondence related to this scheme and any specific types of documentation you require in which you are most interested in, for example, legal agreements.
If you have any further questions relating to this matter, please contact us, quoting reference, MGLA060922-8806.