Supplementary report to the Harris report within IICSA series

Request

I am writing to make a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I understand that the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) transferred its records to The National Archives under series reference ICSA 2.

I would like to request information about a document referenced as HGL000002, which was cited in the IICSA Counsel to the Inquiry’s opening statement for the Lambeth Council Investigation (24 June 2020, page 118) as 'a supplementary report to the Harris Report (1993)' and described as having been provided to the Metropolitan Police by the then Chief Executive of Lambeth Council, Henry Gilby.

To be precise, the opening statement including that reference to document HGL000002 can be found at your website.

Specifically, I would like to know:

• Whether The National Archives holds a copy of the document HGL000002.
• The full title, author(s), date, and description of the document as recorded in The National Archive's catalogue or metadata.
• Whether the document is open to public access, and if not, the reason(s) for closure and the date of any scheduled review.
• If the document is open, how I may access or obtain a copy (e.g., digital download, onsite viewing, or reproduction request).
• If the document is part of a larger series or bundle, please provide the relevant series and item reference.

Outcome

Request refused.

Response

I can confirm that it has not been possible to identify whether the document you have referred to is held within the cost limit, and therefore your request has been refused under section 12 of the FOI Act.

Having conducted a search of our business records and metadata relating to the IICSA series (records created by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse), as well as a digital text-based search of these digital archival records, it has not been possible to identify any records with the reference ‘HGL000002’.

Although the naming convention matches the evidence records within IICSA 2, we cannot find a file identified with that reference in the lists of transferred files, or within any of our digital storage systems. Inquiry record identifiers generally begin with three of four letters representing the provider of the evidence to the inquiry. For IICSA records, HGL appears to represent Henry Gilby, and we only hold a single IICSA record with that evidence provider, IICSA 2/GCT/Z. The title of this record is ‘HGL000046’.

A digital search of ‘HLG000002’ within the contents of the documents held by The National Archives does return one result within an open record with the catalogue reference of INQ006182. Pages 18, 43 and 44 of that document also reference HGL000002 as the 'Supplemental Harris Report'.

It is possible that the document that is referred to as the ‘Supplemental Harris Report’ does exist within an IICSA series record under a different reference or description, but as digital searches have been unable to locate a record by this name, a forensic manual review of the archival records themselves would be required to determine whether this document is held by The National Archives. This is not possible within the cost limit under section 12 of the FOI Act, as there are thousands of records in the IICSA series.

Regardless of whether a record is open or closed, access to archival records collections are governed by the FOI Act, but requests for access are also subject to The Public Record Office (Fees) Regulations 2018 in conjunction with the Public Records Act. This means that TNA is allowed to charge fees if a request is made to conduct research of the archival collection on behalf of a requester.

Details of The National Archives' Paid Search service can be found here in case this is of interest.

You may also wish to consider making a request for advice on where to start any search from one of TNA’s collection experts.Please see this link on how to make such a request.

Although The National Archives is allowed to charge fees for researching the archival collection on behalf of a requester, it does not have to comply with every request. Each request will be assessed separately, but as with any public authority please be advised that TNA may be permitted to refuse a request for information under either section 12 (cost limit exemption) or section 14(1) (where the request is considered to place a grossly oppressive burden on the authority). Whether TNA is able to comply with a paid search request will be considered on a case by case basis.

We hope you find this advice and assistance is informative. Unfortunately, we are not able to provide additional advice at this time on how you would be able to further refine your request in order for relevant information to be located within the cost limit.

Annexe

Section 12: Exemption where cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit:

Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) makes provision for public authorities to refuse requests for information where the cost of dealing with them would exceed an appropriate limit, which for central government departments like The National Archives, is set at £600. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending just over three working days determining whether the department holds the information, as well as locating, retrieving and extracting the information.

We estimate that it will take us in excess of this time to identify the appropriate information, and locate, retrieve and extract it as the scope of your request is too wide-ranging. Therefore, your request will not be processed further.

You may wish to consider refining your request. However, please note that we are unable to guarantee that any refined requests would fall within the cost limit.

Further guidance on the application of this exemption can be found on the ICO website.