MP's expenses - Rob Roberts, and general MP staffing enquiry

I can confirm that we hold information relevant to your request.

Any correspondence with Rob Roberts MP or his office regarding business costs and expenses during his suspension

This point duplicates that from your previous request, RFI-202107-04 received on 12 July and responded to on 04 August 2021. We have checked our system for any correspondence dated after 12 July 2021 and found 6 pieces of ongoing correspondence relating to a claim dating back to 2020. Copies are included in this email with some information being subject to a Refusal Notice under sections 38 and 40 of the FOIA the details of which are below.

RFI-202111-19 – Disclosure documents

Any expense claims made by Rob Roberts MP during June and July 2021

The information we hold is subject to a Refusal Notice under section 21 of the FOIA. This exemption applies because the information is available on our website. IPSA routinely makes available the details of MPs’ staffing and business costs as part of its publication schedule; the latest information was published on 20 January 2022.

A list of the five MPs who have had the highest number of different staff members in this Parliament, giving the number of staff for each MP and the length of service of each member of staff.

See below Refusal Notice under sections 38(1)(b) and 40 of the FOIA.

A list of the five assistants/research assistants who have stayed in their role for the shortest period of time during this Parliament, listing the name of the MP they worked for and the length of service of each member of staff.

The information for these points is subject to a Refusal Notice under sections 38(1)(b) and 40 of the FOIA.

Section 38(1)(b) – health and safety

This exemption applies where disclosure of information would, or would be likely to, endanger the safety of any individual.

IPSA relies on this exemption to withhold any information which could identify members of MPs’ staff and the MPs for whom they may have worked. IPSA maintains that the disclosure of this information carries a high risk of endangering the MP and individuals who may have been employed by them.

IPSA understands how disclosure would enable the public to understand more about the staffing situation in MPs’ offices, particularly with regard to turnover. However, disclosure of the information could lead to conclusions being drawn which are unrelated to the circumstances of an individual’s employment.

In considering disclosure we also have to consider our duty of care to MPs and their staff and any consequences which may arise from our response.

In the first six months of 2021, there was an increase in media reporting on the threats made to MPs and their staff. Not all reports relate to physical attacks on MPs and their staff, but the fear which can be felt from receiving a threat can be mentally and physically damaging. The murder of Sir David Amess MP has highlighted the impact when the threat of physical attack becomes a reality and the recent behaviour towards Sir Keir Starmer, Baroness Smith and David Lammy shows that the situation shows no sign of improvement.

MPs and their staff have difficult jobs, and IPSA is aware that the decision to disclose certain categories of information could make it more difficult for them to fulfil these. This would have a knock-on effect on those whom MPs and their staff try to help. IPSA, therefore, maintains that the public interest in withholding this information outweighs the public interest in disclosure at this time.

Sections 40(2) and 40(3A)(a) – personal data

This exemption applies to information which IPSA considers to be personal data within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation 2016 (UK GDPR) which states,

‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly

IPSA considered that the following are personal data within this definition: names of MPs’ staff members and details about their employment with MPs. We then considered whether disclosure of this personal data would breach any of the Principles relating to the processing of personal data in the UK GDPR.

The relevant principle falls at Article 5(1)(a):

Personal data shall be:

a. Processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject

As IPSA was unable to find a lawful basis on which it could rely, within Article 6 of the UK GDPR, it therefore finds that the information is exempt under section 40.