IT would be against the public interest to publish the details of a controversial Whitehall survey on Scottish attitudes towards independence, which cost taxpayers almost £47,000, the Cabinet Office has concluded.
Roger Smethurst, Head of Knowledge and Information Management at the Cabinet Office, responding to a Freedom of Information request, said that the findings of the market research in January on "attitudes in Scotland towards Scottish independence" would remain secret under section 35(1a) of the Freedom of Information Act, which exempts disclosure of information if it relates to the formation of UK Government policy.
He admitted there was a general public interest in the disclosure of information to encourage public understanding of the issues involved in formulating government policy and a specific public interest in promoting wider understanding of the issues raised by the independence referendum.
But Mr Smethurst said these had to be balanced against the public interest in ensuring Coalition Ministers and officials could continue to formulate and develop policy on this subject; market research, he insisted, was an "essential tool" in that.
It was crucial, he said, that Ministers and their advisers could "freely and without inhibition" use this research to explore all aspects of the issues raised by the referendum.
"It is essential this research remains confidential so that ministers and their advisers can carry out this role effectively and debate such matters with candour," explained Mr Smethurst, adding: "Taking into account all the circumstances of this case, I have concluded the balance of the public interest favours withholding the information."
A Scottish Government source responded by saying: "David Cameron's Government have spent almost £50,000 of taxpayers' cash on opinion polling about independence, which they are determined to keep secret, even under Freedom of Information laws. That is totally unacceptable and totally unsustainable.
"No matter how uncomfortable the results may be for Westminster and the No campaign, they must publish the findings," he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article