FOI 25-110 Orkney First Responder Provision Correspondence

Freedom of Information Request

Reference
FOI 25-110 Orkney First Responder Provision Correspondence
Request Date
05 Mar 2025
Response Date
01 Apr 2025
Information Requested

“I would like to make a Freedom of Information request concerning provision of first responder services in Orkney's isles. By way of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, I would like to request;  

 

  1. Any and all correspondence sent to and received by SAS (including attachments and appendixes to these) concerning this issue.  
  1. Any briefing notes on Orkney first responders. 

 

In this particular request, I am only interested in material spanning the period June 1, 2024, until the present day. 

Response

The Scottish Ambulance Service has a statutory obligation to respond to emergency and urgent calls 

from the people in Scotland wherever they live. The Orkney ferry linked islands are serviced by road (on 

island), air and ferry. The Scottish Ambulance Service has a range of services directly and with partners such as HM Coastguard, that enable us to meet our statutory duties to the communities of Scotland. 

 

Should communities wish to participate in their local Volunteer CFR scheme, the Scottish Ambulance Service is committed to providing training and support to them in their role, so they are in the best possible position to assist our service.  

 

In response to question 1, 

 

Please find attached the extracted information for disclosure, specifically, relating to your request for the period 01/06/2024 -05/03/2024, “any and all correspondence sent to and received by SAS (including attachments and appendixes to these) concerning the issue of provision of first responder services in Orkney’s isles. We have provided this information as an extract as we consider all other information to be exempt under Section 38 1(b) Personal information.  

 

 

 

The Scottish Ambulance service considers your request in part asking for “any and all correspondence sent to and received by SAS (including attachments and appendixes to these) concerning the issue of provision of first responder services in Orkney’s isles.”  to be exempt under Section 30 (b) of the act, section (ii) free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation  

 

An exemption under section 30(b) of FOISA (free and frank exchange of views) applies to the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank exchange of views as well as substantially inhibiting the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation. This exemption recognises the need for staff to have a private space within which to discuss issues and options with stakeholders. Disclosing the content of these discussions on the issue of provision of first responder services in Orkney’s isles, will substantially inhibit such discussions in the future because those involved will be reluctant to provide their views fully and frankly if it is believed that those views are likely to be made public, particularly while these discussions are still ongoing and decisions have not been taken. These discussions also relate to sensitive information. We are of the view that release of this information would restrain, decrease or suppress the freedom with which opinions or options are expressed. 

 

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. The Scottish Ambulance Service acknowledges the public interest in disclosing information as part of an open, transparent and accountable public authority and to inform public debate, particularly in relation to the on-going situation with first responders in Orkney.  However, we have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We believe there is a greater public interest in allowing those leading to have a private space within which to communicate with appropriate stakeholders as part of the process of exploring and refining the impact of first responder services in Orkney’s isles. This private space is essential to enable all issues to be properly considered and decisions can be taken based on fully informed advice and evidence. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between stakeholders, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision-making process, which would not be in the public interest. There is also an important public interest in avoiding the loss of stakeholder confidence in cases where they thought they were providing comments in confidence, which would be inevitable if an individual’s contribution was released against their wishes. 

 

The Scottish Ambulance Service has considered your points raised below:  

 

“I would also like to suggest, pre-emptively, that I think there is a very strong public interest argument for the disclosure of this requested information. Orkney's political representatives have raised some extremely serious concerns about the current provision of first responders, and the willingness of SAS to take this seriously and improve the situation (I've attached three news articles from The Orcadian outlining these concerns). Leader of OIC Heather Woodbridge has said that there is a "risk to life and limb" (see June 13, 2024 story). After almost two years of engagement with SAS, Councillor Woodbridge said that "we have reached an impasse" and that there is "no realistic prospect of progressing the matter further." 

 

I believe the following public interest considerations will favour disclosure in this case (quoting from para.21 of OSIC's briefing note 'The public interest test in FOISA'): 

  • “Whether disclosure would contribute to ensuring the effective oversight of expenditure of public funds and that the public obtain value of money.” SAS being a public body, it’s failure to pay all isles first responders raises serious concerns about the Orkney public obtaining fairness and value from SAS’s expenditures. 
  • “Whether disclosure keeps the public adequately informed of any danger to public health or safety […].” Some isles have been left without first responders, as teams have stood down over the equal pay issue. Leaving isolated communities without such emergency assistance has been described by Orkney’s representatives as a “risk to life and limb.” 
  • “Weather disclosure would contribute to ensuring that any public authority with regulatory responsibilities is adequately discharging its functions.” OIC representatives have alleged on several occasions that SAS is failing to meet its statutory function by not ensuring an equal service across the isles, and by no paying all isles first responders equally. For example, in a December 14, 2022, letter to Pauline Howie, then OIC chief executive John Mundell said: "Therefore, it is apparent that the SAS is unable to comply with its statutory obligations due to a lack of consistent funding going forward from the Scottish Government" (see attached). 
  • “Weather disclosure would […] reveal malpractice or enable the correction of misleading claims.” The suggested malpractice is covered in the previous point regarding the failure to adhere to statutory responsibilities. I also believe that the disclosure of the requested information would potentially correct misleading claims. SAS has previously claimed it is willing to engage with OIC on this issue, but OIC disagrees with this, saying it has been met with intransigence and excuses (see October 24, 2024, story). I suspect the requested information could provide a more accurate account of what SAS's intentions are on this issue. 
  • Lastly, the commissioner notes that “possible embarrassment” and “potential loss of confidence” are not to be considered by public authorities. 

 

However as said above, the Scottish Ambulance service considers:  

 

Taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. we have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We believe there is a greater public interest in allowing those leading to have a private space within which to communicate with appropriate stakeholders as part of the process of exploring and refining the impact of first responder services in Orkney’s isles. 

 

 

In response to question 2,  

 

  1. The Scottish Ambulance confirms we do not hold any information as requested “Any briefing notes on Orkney first responders.” Scottish Ambulance Service applies Section 17 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. 
Response Documents

FOI 25 110 Correspondence For Disclosure (1) (1) (PDF | 30KB)

In This Section