FOI
Adults and juveniles still mixed in local jails
(CNS): Despite the obvious human rights implications, older men are still being house with young offenders at Eagle House and teenagers are still being housed inside the adult prison at Northward. Although the originally prescribed age limit on inmates at Eagle House, the centre deigned for the country’s youngest offenders, an FOI request by a CNS reader has revealed it is still holding 25 men over the age of 22, fifteen of which are aged over 30. Meanwhile, there are twenty young men aged 21 or under being incarcerated in HMP Northward, the men’s adult prison, two of whom are boys under the age of 17.
The issue of housing young offenders alongside male adult inmates has been an ongoing issue for the prison service but it continues to present human rights violations against prisoners.
The government has begun the development of a youth offenders centre, which will follow the innovative Missouri model for treating young people who have been caught up in the criminal justice system. The ministry has confirmed that unless there are unexpected delays, it is scheduled to open in September next year, even though the Bill of Rights will come into force in Cayman in just six weeks.
At the time the 2009 constitution was drawn up, government was given an extra year after the Bill of Rights came into force to complete the facility that will eventually address the problem ofwhere to put those convicted of a custodial sentence by the courts who are under 21.
Currently, the Bonaventure Boys home in West Bay is already following the Missouri system, which takes an entirely modern approach to dealing with both convicted offenders and troubled youth. CNS has been unable to ascertain if any of the residents at that facility, described as a rehabilitation school and a detention facility for juveniles (minors under the age of 18), are serving custodial sentences handed down by the courts.
However, the FOI request has revealed that teens are serving time in an adult prison and those in the young offenders facility are also being housed alongside adults. In addition, the inmates at Eagle House are serving a diverse range of sentences for a wide range of crimes, from serious offences such as rape and murder to minor infringements such as possession of ganja.
The issue of overcrowding in prison systems has led to youngsters serving jail terms being increasingly housed alongside adults in the UK as well. A report published by the Prison Reform Trust earlier this month found that two thirds of adult prisons in England and Wales are overcrowded, with youngsters being inappropriately housed with adult offenders.
As young people who commit crimes are seen as a distinct group, experts say they should be housed and dealt with separately from older prisoners with prison staff that has specialist training for dealing with young offenders. Prison reformers also point to the problems young offenders face in the adult system. The experts say teen prisoners in adult jails face a higher risk of being assaulted, are more prone to suicide and are 34 percent more likely to commit crimes once released than offenders who serve time in juvenile facilities.
See details of inmate ages and crimes committed below.
Delays & lawyers plague FOI
(CNS): While some public authorities have embraced the freedom of information law and are proactively publishing more and more information, others seem to be doing everything they can to prevent information from coming, says the information commissioner. Ahead of this year’s Right to Know Week, when her office promotes the right of the people to access information Jennifer Dilbert said the use of delaying tactics, time wasting and lawyers were becoming all too common with some government entities. Once again, the information boss pointed out that it is not access to information that costs the public purse but efforts to try and thwart that access.
She pointed out that the law helps government save money because when civil servants know everything they do could be under transparent public scrutiny they may think twice about what they spend. Moreover, she pointed out, it is free to publish information on websites or release documents to applicant. The costs come when public sector workers spend time trying to find ways to block applicants and when lawyers become involved.
“Of course it is the right of every public authority to engage lawyers but we believe the information managers need to engage more with the applicants as often requests can be narrowed and time wasting cut down if they communicate,” Dilbert told CNS. “In some cases, when getting down to the finer points of a request, information managers may feel they need a lawyer but in most cases the managers are trained and they should be able to handle the majority of requests, especially if they discuss the issue with the customer and use a more common sense approach,” she added.
Dilbert also noted that slow progress was being made on the review of the law which formed part of the legislation passed in 2009. However, she said, since the review committee began looking at the changes needed to make the law function better, other issues have now emerged regarding the law and her office’s dwindling resources and she said it did need to be reviewed further.
Since the law came into effect in January 2009 up until June 2012, Dilbert and her team have handled 95 appeals where applicants have been denied information. Seventy-nine of those were resolved, including twenty cases which went to hearings before the commissioner.
During this year’s Right to Know Week Christina Smith, the ICO’s office manager, said the small team were doing as much as they could with limited resources to promote the theme of “It's yours, just ask”, which makes it clear that as the government represents the people, the people have the right of access to what it does.
Over the coming weeks the team from the ICO will be out and about promoting this and encouraging people to use the law. The week opens with a church service on 23 September and culminates in an appearance at Market at the Grounds on Saturday. Right To Know Day will be celebrated on 28 September.
$100k fine for abusing info
(CNS): Companies, government and even charities could face a hefty fine if they misuse information once the proposed Data Protection Law is implemented. The need for such legislation in Cayman has grown recently with the arrival of CCTV cameras and the soon to be implemented Bill of Rights. Presently, there are no controls over how personal information is used and the new law will ensure that no individual or entity can misuse sensitive data, according Deputy Information Commissioner Jan Liebaers. While the country does not yet have protective legislation, fortunately there is little evidence of any major misuse to date, he said. However, in future those that do breech the law could pay as much as $100,000 in fines.
Once the law is enacted, it will be monitored and enforced by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which will be striking the balance between transparency and protection.
The Data Protection Law is not just limited to government, however, as it extends to the private sector and all organisations, including churches. The people who control data will need to manage that information properly and take responsibility for the informaiton they hold. While entities will still be able to store and retain information for legitimate purposes, the law will focus on protecting people from the abuse and illegitimate use of information.
Jan Liebaers told CNS that the ICO will be embarking on a widespread awareness and education campaign well before the law is passed and, once it is passed, the implementation would likely be staggered over at least 12 months to enable everyone to comply.
Although the law will impact a wide cross-section of the community, many organisations will find that they are already compliant. Liebaers explained that the implementation of the Bill of Rights in November enshrines the right to a private life, which means that there must be legislation to uphold that right and consequences if privacy of personal and sensitive information is breeched.
There are exemptions about the use of data by law enforcement officials and even for legitimate purposes by journalists as the emphasis is on the proper management of information held by controllers that is considered sensitive and using it appropriately.
While the ICO will have powers to investigate complaints and enforce the law, Liebaers said that the introduction of the law was not all about enforcement but about ensuring that information is held properly and the individual's right to privacy is protected.
With budgets tight in government, Liebaers admitted that in order for the ICO to manage both freedom of information and data protection properly, the office will need to be properly resourced to ensure one or the other does not suffer. He estimated that once the law is enforced it would require around three new staff members.
The law is currently going through a consultation process and Liebaers, who was part of the work group that drew up the parameters of law, encouraged everyone to read and consider the draft legislation and submit their comments to ensure that the final draft is fit for purpose.
The 69 page draft Data Protection Bill 2012 and the accompanying consultation papers are available at www.dataprotection.ky and in hard copy from the Government Administration Building at 133 Elgin Avenue. Members of the public are asked to provide comments by Friday, 2 November 2012 and can call 244 3607 for more information.
Portfolio takes full 45 days to comply with info boss
(CNS): The information commissioner expressed her disappointment on Monday that the Portfolio of the Civil Service and the Office of the Deputy Governor waited until the last minutes to hand over documents that she had ordered be released in connection with the recent recruitment of three senior civil servants. She confirmed that the public authority had finally complied with an order she made in her 21st decision handed down in July. Just ahead of Right to Know Week later this month, Jennifer Dilbert pointed out that the portfolio had waited the full 45 days to release the records.
The documents relateto an FOI request made by an applicant regarding the appointment of three chief officers made this January. During the hearing Dilbert upheld the decision of the portfolio to redact some information but overturned the decision to withhold the resumes and qualifications for the successful candidates. She also overturned the decision to redact some information contained in the unfinished unsigned panel report provided to the applicant and ordered the disclosure of an unredacted copy, as well as other relevant records that she had identified and ordered their disclosure.
The commissioner had also revealed that the portfolio and the deputy governor’s office were in contravention of the Freedom of Information Law with respect to the record keeping for the recruitment exercise for chief officers conducted in January 2012.
PoCs slammed by info boss
(CNS): The government body responsible for managing the recruitment process of public sector workers failed to follow its own rules during the recent appointment of three top jobs. The revelation comes from the information commissioner, whose office uncovered the failure during a hearing after a records request was refused by the Portfolio of the Civil Service. Jennifer Dilbert ordered records to be disclosed in connection with the recent recruitment process of three chief officers but also made damning criticisms of the record keeping and handling of the request by the authority. She also expressed her concerns that important records that should have been available simply didn’t even exist.
“It is extraordinary that best practices in recruitment have not been followed in this case, by the very public authority that is responsible for enforcing these practices in other public authorities, and in relation to the recruitment of three very senior public officers,” the information boss said.
In January an applicant applied to the portfolio for records relating to the recruitment of Stran Bodden, Eric Bush and Alan Jones as chief officers, including the criteria used to select the shortlist, the score sheets of the various assessments, interview notes, thepanel report, the resumes of the candidates and other relevant information from the interview process.
Although some records were released when the applicant appealed, numerous problems were uncovered as well as many more documents, according to Dilbert’s report.
“There were numerous problems with the handling of this request,” she wrote in her 21st decision. “While PoCS initially insisted that the seven pages of records supplied to the Applicant in the first instance constituted a full response, this is negated by the fact that numerous other responsive records were subsequently identified.”
Dilbert found that the information manager didn’t advise the applicant of their right to an internal review or their right to appeal, among many other problems with the request, in particular the record keeping issues. She pointed out that every public body is required to maintain its records in a manner which facilitates access.
“It is evident that the record keeping relating to the responsive records in this case was deficient, and that the identification of records responsive to this FOI request suffered as a result," Dilbert found, adding that there was a lack of coordination in the identification and location of records with many being uncovered at the last minute.
A panel report from the interview process was not finalized and signed, which Dilbert said was “extraordinary” as best practices in recruitment had not been followed by the very authority responsible for enforcing such practices and in relation to the recruitment of three very senior public officers.
“This is even more disturbing as in this instance PoCS was charged with the responsibility of providing logistical support for the Deputy Governor’s Office for this very important interview process, and for retaining records arising from the process.”
She said it would be expected “that record keeping and indeed responses to FOI requests with respect to HR matters would be exemplary in this Portfolio, and would set the standard for other public authorities,” but this was definitely not the case.
Dilbert added that Peter Gough’s comments that key records “came to light” during the hearing served to heighten her concerns over the obvious anomalies which obviously occurred during the recruitment exercise and “lack of respect for” the FOI Law.
“Responsive records which have been promised seemed to have vanished, and others which were purported not to exist pop up unexpectedly, all of which makes a mockery of transparency and accountability and reflects very badly on the civil service, which already has serious credibility issues,’” she added in her report.
She criticised the handling of the request, which she said was “passed from pillar to post” further delaying the process, which also led to the applicant questioning whether records were deliberately being withheld.
“The concerns of the Applicant were further elevated in the light of the fact that from records received it was determined that one of the successful candidates scored only 1.05 points more than the unsuccessful candidate rated fourth in the exercise (133.965 vs 132.915),” Dilbert wrote. “Accurate record keeping is therefore all the more essential to support the final choice of candidate, and to endorse the validity of the recorded information.”
She added that the poor handling of the records relating to a crucial recruitment exercise, and the poor handling of the request, had the potential to reflect badly on the exercise itself.
‘The lesson to be learned here is that not only must public authorities act properly, they must also record their actions properly, and promote the disclosure of these records as much as possible,” the information commissioner noted. “The time and effort spent dealing with this FOI request could have been avoided with better record keeping and a culture of openness.”
Although the PoCS claimed to have acted in good faith during the process of the request and hearing, Dilbert said she could not agree with that claim.
“The experience of the Applicant and of this Office in dealing with the appeal does not reflect an acceptable approach to disclosure," she said as she slammed one of government’s key authorities. “I find it interesting that Mr (Ian) Fenton can speak so strongly about the open and fair manner in which the Portfolio has operated, when in fact, at the outset, the minimum response was offered and it was only after the intervention of the ICO via mediation that additional records were forthcoming.”
In her final decision Dilbert upheld the redaction of some information but overturned the Portfolio’s decision to withhold the resumes and proof of education of the three successful candidates and reversed the decision of the Office of the Deputy Governor to redact some information from the unfinished interview panel report.
The authority still has 45 calendar days to appeal Dilbert’s decision to the Grand Court and can keep the documents under wraps during that time, stretching the 30 day request, as is becoming increasingly common, into more than 8 months.
Panama party cost $70k
(CNS): Government spent over $70,000 on a two-day promotion in Panama at the end of May when it took some 38 delegates on an excursion to the new Cayman Airways destination. Records released by the Department of Tourism following a freedom of information request by CNS revealed that the two-day event marking the launch of the Cayman Airways direct service into Panama City cost the public purse $ 71,489.16. Officials said the trip was designed to promote the Cayman Islands as a new leisure destination to travel trade professionals and to Panama’s media. The 38 delegates included guests of the premier, the Chamber of Commerce and CITA representatives, as well as private sector tourism stakeholders.
The event took place between the 28-31 May, while civil servants back in Cayman were struggling to produce the 2012/13 budget. The premier came in for severe criticism from the opposition and the public over this and other trips he took against the backdrop of the ongoing budget crisis.
The two-day party followed the inaugural flight by CAL to the destination, which is hoped will develop into an important trade route for Cayman and produce future dividends. As this was an inaugural trip, the premier invited a contingency of people, described as “influential Caymanians” in a release from the department following the trip.
“The goal behind this action was to help enhance future package development for the route and to also help to educate the Caymanian public as to the potential benefits of such areas as cost-effective overseas medical care,” officials said.
Panama is currently being cited by government as a possible alternative to reduce Cayman's overseas medical care. The country is also believed to offer trade and tourism expansion projects, as air traffic routed through the country to and from Latin America is set to increase; and the Panama Canal is projected to double capacity starting in 2014.
Meanwhile, the director of tourism said the Cayman party was necessary to help promote the Cayman brand as it is little known in Panama.
“As The Cayman Islands has very little brand awareness in the Panamanian market, it is important that the rich sounds, colours and excitement are incorporated into marketing and promotional activities such as this, to help paint a vibrant image on a previously blank canvass and give a sweet taste of what we in the Cayman Islands have to offer,” Shomari Scott he said in the release.
He added that between 60 and 75 of the top travel agents attended and some of the leading TV programmes in Panama were on hand to cover the information session.
“We were able to excite, educate about the destination and introduce the wholesaler that will be distributing the Cayman Islands product to the travel agents, and this is ultimately the channel that will influence and facilitate travellers from this region,” Scott said of the $70k promotional investment.
The bill for the Panama party included $14,717.36 for accommodation at Le Meridien Hotel, Panama City, for delegates and $19,000 in airfares and around $25,000 for the main Cayman Nights event.
See details in released records below. The DoT has redacted the names of the delegates under the provisions of section 23 of the Freedom of Information Law, which deals with personal information .
Related articles:
Unusual duty waivers granted
(CNS): An open records request has revealed an array of unusual duty waivers granted by government over a period of six months, including T-shirts, souvenirs, guns, heavy equipment, an elevator and even fireworks. The duty waivers have been granted not just to charities or schools but to a number of private companies and retailers, according to the partially redacted list supplied under the freedom of information law following an application by independent MLA Ezzard Miller. The list also shows that 26 of the waivers have been granted directly by the premier. Close to $200,000 of duty was waived, the document shows, between 1 July and 31 December last year.
Miller pointed out that this was just a snapshot of the waivers that appeared to be getting pushed through, not just because of government policy or at the discretion of the customs department, but also at the request of the premier. The independent member questioned the validity of waivers, at least on some of the items, at a time when the public finances are facing such dire consequences that government has been unable to produce a budget for the next financial year.
“I can’t see why we would be giving duty waivers on imported fireworks,” Miller said as he noted a more than $7,000 waiver for Cayman Firepower. “I find it incredible that, at a time when government is so short of revenue, it can give away so many duty waivers, some of which are for significant amounts of money.”
The MLA also noted that, according to the Public Management and Finance Law, McKeeva Bush can only give the duty waivers in his position as finance minister and not as the country’s premier.
Miller said that while they may be one and the same person, it was important to remember that the offices are two separate and very different entities in the law.
He also raised concerns that not all of the names on the request had been revealed, so the public could not be sure exactly who or what was in receipt of the waivers, in particular those given by the premier, and why.
Many of the waivers are given as part of government policy, such as solar and other eco-friendly equipment. Some on the list also cover equipment being bought by government itself or statutory authorities and government owned companies, but a considerable number of the items on the list have been waived without an obvious explanation.
Given that the list only covered one sixth month period, Miller said that considerable revenue could have been lost over this financial year if similar waivers were given over the last six months.
UK Lord costs £14k+ pcm
(CNS): Lord Blencathra and his consultancy company are costing the public purse more than CI$19,500 per month to represent the Cayman Islands. Records released following an FOI request show government has contracted both the Tory peer and his firm, Two Lions, to promote Cayman’s interests in the corridors of power in London and Brussels. Although appointed as director of the London office, he is not on a salary but is invoicing the Cayman government on a monthly basis at a rate of £12,000 per month, plus 20% VAT. The contract also reveals that Lord Blencathra’s focus is different from the historic requirements of the job in that he is assisting the CIG with its public finance difficulties with the FCO.
According to the contract, which was released with other records in response to a freedom of information request made by CNS, the Conservative peer’s role includes helping with the FCO and the Cayman government’s financial management issues. As a result, redacted correspondence between Blencathra and Cayman civil servants implies that his appointment was timed to ensure that he could attend the London meeting the premier had with OT minister, Henry Bellingham, last November, during which McKeeva Bush signed the Financial Framework Agreement.
Another of Blencathra’s functions is to present the “premier of the Cayman Islands and CIG ministers to the British government in the best possible light” and to help develop the relationship between the UK and Cayman.
Primarily the peer is focusing on promoting the Cayman Islands’ interests, in particular where the financial services industry is concerned, in the UK and Europe and to improve its overall image and reputation.
The contract shows that government felt in the “changing global financial circumstances” that the London office needed to expand its traditional goals to include strengthening the relationship between the Cayman government and the FCO, as well as other UK and European organisations, and actively promote Cayman in the business communities there. The contract also points to the need for someone to help identify opportunities for development and inward investment to diversify the Cayman economy and expand the islands’ revenue base.
The contract states that Lord Blencathra and his firm, Two Lions Consultancy, had been identified as having the experience and skills to undertake the proposed expansion of the London Office, working alongside the deputy director, Charles Parchment, who would continue to take on the more traditional duties of the London office.
According to the Department of Commerce and Investment, the London Office has three staff members, and its budget for 2011/12 totalled CI$817, 763.
See redacted correspondence of the negotiations between Lord Blencathra and CIG, his CV and contract.
EAB dump review curtailed
(CNS): Board minutes released by the Water Authority following a freedom of information request have revealed that government limited the parameters of an environmental review of the proposed new waste-management site in Bodden Town. The minutes show that the Environmental Advisory Board set up to assess the proposal for Dart to establish a new landfill in the Midland Acres area must confine itself to examining the proposal and not to what would be the most suitable overall waste management solution for Grand Cayman. The revelation has outraged the members of a local pressure group campaigning to have the George Town dump dealt with on site and not moved to their district.
The Coalition to Keep Bodden town Dump Free made the FOI request for information and were stunned to see that the minutes reveal explicit orders from government ministers to the EAB to limit what it reviews and not to look at alternate sites or consider other solutions but to look solely at the dart proposition.
Although an EAB is not yet a legal requirement in Cayman because of the failure of the government to enact the National Conservation Bill on larger projects, the boards are being established as a matter of good governance. However, in this case the terms of reference have been significantly curtailed to examine the impact on the immediate environment of the first part of the new site the islands’ largest developer has promised to construct in exchange for the current landfill.
Dart proposes to build only phase one — a single cell on what could eventually be a state of the art waste-management centre — if government were to make the rest of necessary investment to set up recycling, reuse, composting or waste to energy solutions. Once Dart has lined the one landfill cell site, it intends to hand that over to the Department of Environmental Health to manage and then it proposes to take over the George Town dump to remediate and cap that site, which is next to its major investment, Camana Bay.
The minutes make it clear that Dart proposes only to develop one landfill cell site and no other elements of the new facility on a 100-acre site. Government has touted the proposal as a modern eco-park but the minutes show Dart is only proposing to create a new lined cell where the DoEH can start a new garbage pile. Any further investment or development of modern waste-management facilities will be in the hands of government.
The coalition continues to be alarmed at the proposal as it says it wants to see government tackle the dump at the present location instead of risking contamination of a new site, especially given its environmentally sensitive location, its proximity to residential communities and that it is a considerable distance from the capital, where the majority of waste is generated.
Campaigners have raised concerned that no research or analysis has been done about the proposed new dump and that government has simply accepted the Dart proposal without properly considering the alternatives, especially after the original Dart bid for the landfill was rejected by the technical committee set up by government when it carried out an RFP for the dump soon after assuming office. The CTC had recommended a waste-to-energy solution on site in GT with a leading American waste firm Wheelabrator, which had partnered with Cayman Waste Management Ltd, a local company.
The coalition has persistently asked government to identify clearly the reasons why it ditched its agreement to tender the waste-to-energy facility to solve the George Town landfill problem where it is, without contaminating a new site.
“Government inexplicably ignored due process, transparency, and the Central Tenders Committee (CTC), which recommended the WTE proposal as its first choice. The CTC rejected Dart’s proposal to move the dump and gave it the lowest marks of any option considered, because of 'grave concern' about the impact of a dump in an 'environmentally sensitive' area,” a coalition spokesperson said this week on receiving the minutes. “Government and Dart have yet to answer a single Coalition question, or produce any of the documents asked for.”
Campaigners received responses to FOI requests last month from both the NRA and the planning department, both of which stated they had no records to release in response to the request by the coalition about meetings with Dart on the proposed new dump.
Flyers placed in Bodden Town post boxes in early February from the ForCayman Investment Alliance stated that "meetings have occurred” between Dart and Government about the proposed new Bodden Town landfill, a claim not supported by either plannnig or the NRA.
Info boss orders release of 4 year old pension report
(CNS): Attempts by the Public Service Pensions Board to keep a four-year-old report under wraps have been thwarted by the information commissioner, who has ordered its release. Jennifer Dilbert not only found that the pension board’s refusal based on the fact that the report had not yet been tabled in the Legislative Assembly was wrong but that far too much time had passed on the report. She said that the primary purpose of the review was not to present a report to the financial secretary and Cabinet but to assess and evaluate the viability of the fund. This was the second time an applicant requested a copy of The Actuarial Valuation of the Public Service Pension Plan 2008 after the request was deferred in 2009 because it had not been tabled in the LA.
In her 20th decision since taking office, Dilbert overturned the Public Service Pensions Board’s deferral of access to the valuation document and ordered its release.
In October last year a Freedom of Information request for the report was made and declined on the grounds that it was waiting to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
However, under the Public Service Pensions Law, at least every three years the PSPB must have a review carried out by an actuary to assess and evaluate the assets and liabilities of the Public Service Pensions Fund. A report of the actuarial review is to be sent to the Financial Secretary, who is required to table it in the Legislative Assembly and make the report public.
In making the decision to release the record, the commissioner reviewed the Public Service Pensions Law, the Legislative Assembly Standing Orders, the FOI law and FOI regulations and found no restrictions regarding release of the record.
“The deferral in section 11(2)(b) does not apply to the responsive record as it was not prepared for presentation to the Legislative Assembly or for the purpose of being made available to a particular person or body. Even if it was prepared for presentation to a person or body, a reasonable period after its preparation for it to be so presented or made available to that person or body has expired,” Dilbert said.
The commissioner had previously upheld the PSPB’s decision to defer access to the record back in 2009 but in this instance she noted that over three years has passed and the report has still not been tabled and gazetted as required.
Although the PSPB claimed the responsive record was prepared for presentation to the financial secretary and Cabinet for subsequent tabling in the Legislative Assembly, Dilbert said she disagreed.
“Section 12(1) of the Public Service Pensions Law sets out that the actuarial review is to be carried out in order to assess and evaluate the assets and liabilities of the Fund. The primary purpose of the review is not to present a report on it to the Financial Secretary and Cabinet, but to assess and evaluate the viability of the Fund,” she said in her decision.
The board said that the 2008 report was meant to be combined with the more recent 2011 report which is currently being prepared and then tabled in the Legislative Assembly. However, Dilbert wrote that the planned incorporation of the older report in the 2011 was irrelevant to its release and could not be used to justify a further deferral.
The board has 45 days to appeal to the Grand Court by way of judicial review but if not the report must be released.
See the full decision below or visit www.INFOCOMM.ky