Don Buxton probes for information – response now in!

We brought you the news that Don Buxton was enquiring of the Council what had happened to a previous loan to the ‘Millers’ of £25,000. Read Don’s questions by clicking on this link to the original post, Don Buxton probes for information.

Response:

RMBC do not hold any information and therefore we cannot provide a response to your questions. Any financial information pertaining to the 1986 loan has been destroyed in accordance with guidelines for the retention of financial data.

In accordance with the procedures of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC), I am advising you that the cost to the authority in responding to this request has been £106 which reflects the staff time and administration costs involved. RMBC however does not currently make any charge to customers for processing Freedom of Information Act requests.

If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to an internal review by the Council.  Please contact us via the above email address or by post to Sarah Corbett, Information Governance Manager, Legal Services, Council Offices, Doncaster Gate, Doncaster Road , Rotherham . South Yorkshire , S65 1DJ.

If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner.  Contact details are: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane , Wilmslow, Cheshire . SK9 5AF. Telephone 01625 545700. Alternatively go to http://www.ico.gov.uk/
Regards
Wayne Singleton

Records & Information Management Officer
Information Governance Unit
Legal Services
Chief Executives Directorate
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Tel From New: (01709) 746872
Tel From Old: (01709) 336872
Fax: (01709) 336969
Email: wayne.singleton@rotherham.gov.uk
Visit our website: http://www.rotherham.gov.uk
Before printing, think about the environment
The information in this e-mail is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it was addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise the sender by using the reply facility in your e-mail software, and then delete it from your system. Rotherham MBC may monitor the content of the e-mails sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with the law and with RMBC policies. Any views or opinions presented are only those of the author and not those of Rotherham MBC.

Not satisfied Don Buxton replied on the 7th September:

From: DON BUXTON [mailto: donbuxton@btinternet.com ]
Sent: 06 September 2011 17:29
To: FreedomofInformation
Subject: Re: Freedom Of Information Request (330) – Response

Dear Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk

Thank you for your predictable and much anticipated FOI response which was entirely in line with my modest expectations. It comes as no surprise whatsoever to me that RMBC is relying on corporate Transient Global Amnesia (TGA) to reply to my question.

It also appears from the historic records of the Advertiser from which the story was originally gleaned that there was also similar collective TGA among the Labour Elected Members of 1986 who also appeared to have no such recall of the specific terms and conditions of their dispensation of public largesse at that time.

You further make reference to a ridiculous spurious notional sum of £106 for the production of the response to me. I shall be grateful if you will be kind enough to specifically quantify and itemise the basis upon which you make your fanciful hypothetical financial calculation.

Also please further advise me on whether the complete financial details in relation to the sum of £5 Million of taxpayers’ money which has been publicised this year as being offered to Rotherham United FC will be available to obtain and peruse in detail under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

A timely response was received:

From: FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: RE: Freedom Of Information Request (330) – Response
To: “DON BUXTON” <donbuxton@btinternet.com>
Date: Wednesday, 7 September, 2011, 9:11

Dear Mr Buxton,

The cost was calculated as follows:

Access to Information Officer, Logging, administration and response Band F 1 hour £21.38
Chief Accountant , Research PO18 1.5 hours £84.29

Yours sincerely,
Sarah Corbett

Information Governance Manager
Information Governance Unit
Legal Services
Chief Executives Directorate
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Don Buxton now incredulous responded thus:

Dear Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk

Thank you for your specific itemised breakdown in relation to the spurious notional sum of £106 which you originally included in your FOI response to me.

I am simply amazed that RMBC admit that it has taken them 1 hour for an Access to Information Officer to “log, administer and respond” and then it has further taken a Chief Accountant 1.5 hours to “research”, in order to provide me with the meagre response of: “RMBC do not hold any information and therefore we cannot provide a response to your questions. Any financial information pertaining to the 1986 loan has been destroyed in accordance with guidelines for the retention of financial data.”
Yours Sincerely,

Donald H. Buxton

8 thoughts on “Don Buxton probes for information – response now in!

  1. The unanswered question!
    Also please further advise me on whether the complete financial details in relation to the sum of £5 Million of taxpayers’ money which has been publicised this year as being offered to Rotherham United FC will be available to obtain and peruse in detail under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act?

    Like

    • That must count as one of your more ignorant statements. You cannot have understood what is going on here. I am sure it will be explained in words of one syllable by others who may not be quite so polite!

      Like

      • No.

        Not ignorant, just realistic.

        So you want the Council to employ someone, free up office space, maintain files and records from a year after I was born. Consider it boys and girls…not just any old files, but the files relating to a loan which was given to a football club. Not a massive nuclear plant, not the building of Parkgate, the situation with crime or disorder or, even, God forbid, our response or predicted response to a terrorist attack. No. What did RUFC do with 25k in 1986…?

        Sorry chaps, I can’t say I’m brimming with excitement when I read this. Not because it’s a strange and highly irrelevant question BUT because the person that made the request is an individual who seeks to score points over the Council, in public, like a child.

        What a sad day it is. Line up behind him, come on now folks, get ready to lick! Not you Rob old boy, your Leader. There you go chap, here’s a badge that say’s ‘Leader’ on it. Good show.

        Like

  2. Dear dear Patrick,

    IMHO as a Rotherham ratepayer, Don Buxton, is absolutely entitled to challenge any statutory public authority to obtain information using the Freedom of Information Act.

    You as a resident of Conisbrough in the Metropolitan Borough of Doncaster are not financially affected, advantaged nor disadvantaged by any Rotherham citizen who scrutinises the activities of Rotherham MBC via FOI or obtains any other form of service from RMBC.

    On these pages you continue to display such a childlike bewildering charming naive innocence with regard to life’s events and politics here in Rotherham and I sincerely suggest that you summon up the courage to, fly the nest, hatch a brood of darling Junior Community Champions, purchase a property somewhere within Rotherham MBC and begin paying your community charge to the Caution Cabinet Clown’s muppets and minions at Town Hall Towers and then, just maybe, you may awake from your somnambulant cherubic posture and exist in the daily reality of life here in the Socialist Fiefdom of Rogerland.

    Until you have you become a resident and ratepayer of Rotherham I suggest that you try to refrain from spouting the lingua scrotum that you have lately proffered here.

    Like

  3. Deary dear Patrick,

    Are you really for real?

    I just don’t believe how you can be so utterly disingenuous with your previous posting re: Don Buxton. Well, I do know actually, you’re only mimicking the behaviour of Da Dodger, Corn Fed Hogs and Muppets and the Caution Cabinet Clown, and displaying their same level of intellect.

    Well done Patrick, you’ve just graduated with a Double Whammy from Town Hall Towers School of Disingenuity and Muppetry, duh 😦

    Here’s the link to your own FOI enquiries – http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/patrick%20j%20cawkwell – I have just had a great belly laugh at the unsuccessful puny efforts that you have undertaken, I’m sure those statutory agencies had just as much of a laugh too.

    Like

    • I see you have stooped to the childish levels of Robert ‘Trambuster’ Foulds. Our ever so nearly elected Cllr. Not to worry. It was never going to take long that someone with an impartial view was going to be pushed out. It doesn’t bother me – just proves a point. That point is – you either are against RMBC publicly or you are not against them at all.

      As for my FOI’s…sorry old chap, again, I don’t make mine to score points, or to look good, gain friends, or a reputation, I carry those out to assist me in my work to move towards a better South Yorkshire for everyone. Mr Buxton use’s his democratic right to waste £106 about a loan that was made available in the mid 80’s to a football club. How is that constructive for today, and today’s problems?

      Fly the nest…? Done that old chap sorry. Have kids? No thanks, one might grow up to be a small minded fool who constantly bangs on about something NOT for the public good, NOT cause he feel’s passionate about it but because he get’s his name in the Rotherham Advertiser. That’s what this is all about.

      The fact you attack me for it just, once again, proves my point.

      Like

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.