-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Blog on CCG aboliton and move to ICB / ICP #1244
Comments
We could mention the problems we've had with new email addresses for ICBs not working for two weeks after the bodies were established. We could note the issues with there being many bodies with names like, or in some cases matching "Integrated Care Partnership" but them not being the new joint committees. We could note the issue at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/gp_level_of_service_concerns_sub#incoming-2079192 where a CCG/ICB states a FOI request in-progress at the time of transition will not continue to be processed:
|
Tweet on the ICB not concluding the request made to the CCG https://twitter.com/WhatDoTheyKnow/status/1546882556980781059 |
Once we've written the blog we could, if it was deemed in-line with our campaigning strategy, let organisations which might want to use our service such as local Healthwatch bodies, or organisations supporting those with certain conditions, and health journalists, know about it, and our service. |
We are now less confident about this, as the Partnerships might not be deemed to be "body corporate" in-line with the general treatment of partnerships other than limited liability partnerships in relation to other aspects of the law in England and Wales. The partnerships are joint committees. Joint committees are subject to FOI in their own right in certain circumstances, via https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/schedule/1/paragraph/25 and https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/70/section/102 but that doesn't apply here as it only applies to joint committees of local authorities. So the FOI status of ICPs might be something we need to campaign on as part of: |
Another example of an issue with the transition: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_provision_of_telehealth_tech#incoming-2159875 Also it appears there is just one, generic, "transfer scheme" There is no explicit reference to access to information requests. The responsibility to respond to a request could perhaps be considered a "liability" covered by:
|
Surprisingly it appears many ICPs are yet to be established. It may be only the ICB is formally subject to FOI so we should just have placeholders for the ICP and ICS pointing to the entry for the ICB. There may be regional variation as to the extent to which the ICPs / ICBs "exist". Ideas:
|
The Government has asked that arrangements be made for ICPs to have a secretariat. If the "body" has a secretariat then there's a group to whom requests can be made. The Government has also stated:
Again this indicates that contacting an ICP is something which should be practical. (To throw in some more confusion, the Government also refers to the "The ICS partnership", and in doing so it doesn't mean the ICP. |
I've added a note to ICPs:
|
There is a parallel with the recent changes to Government departments: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/making-government-deliver-for-the-british-people The change hasn't been instant, and there has been a period of transition. We are still awaiting email addresses for new departments a few weeks after they have been created. |
Requires: #1022
All ICBs will be subject to FOI via
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2022/31/schedule/4/paragraph/60/enacted
ICPs will be subject to FOI because they are joint committees of councils and ICBs, so all members are public bodies so Section 6 of the Freedom of Information Act will apply.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: