Chamber and committees

A claim for public interest immunitymay be advanced where it is considered that disclosure of a document would be harmfulto the public interest. If disclosure of a document might be harmful to the publicinterest consideration will be given to whether the public interest in its disclosureoutweighs the interest in its non disclosure. This will depend on the facts of thecase; how important the document is to the rights or interests of the person whoseeks its disclosure; the degree of risk and the nature of the harm to the publicinterest which might result from disclosure.

This would depend on the circumstancesof the case. It is not uncommon in cases in which an issue of public interest immunityarises for there to be discussions between the parties or their legal representativesas to the importance or relevance of the document or information in question andwhether there is any scope for agreeing relevant facts without disclosing sensitiveor confidential information.

I refer to the answer to questionS2W-24117 on 22 March 2006 in which I explained that there are no prescribed proceduresfor issuing public interest immunity certificates. The question posed does not arise.

The minister who signs the certificate.

This would depend on the factsof the case and the circumstances in which the information had come to be in thepublic domain. For example, the public interest might weigh in favour of a claimbeing asserted where the information had been obtained in breach of a duty of confidentialityor in breach of the principles in the Data Protection Act 1998, particularlywhere the public interest in non disclosure of the type of information in questionwas a strong one.

This would depend on the factsof the case and the circumstances in which the information had come to be in thepublic domain. For example, the public interest might weigh in favour of a claimbeing asserted where the information had been obtained in breach of a duty of confidentialityor in breach of the principles in the Data Protection Act 1998, particularlywhere the public interest in non-disclosure of the type of information in questionwas a strong one.

We intend to publish the informationcollected from these questionnaires on a regular basis. I expect to be able to publishthe first of these reports in the coming months.

Between the launch of the schemeon 22 June 2005 and the end of February 2006 a total of 1497 people havesuccessfully applied to the Fresh Talent: Working in Scotland scheme.The breakdown by nationality is in the following table:

Albania	3
Angola	1
Argentina	1
Australia	2
Bahrain	1
Bangladesh	15
Barbados	2
Belarus	1
Bolivia	1
Brazil	2
British National (Overseas)	5
British Overseas Citizen	2
Brunei	2
Bulgaria	2
Cameroon	8
Canada	10
Chile	3
China	480
Columbia	1
Croatia	1
Ecuador	1
Egypt	3
Ethiopia	2
Fiji	1
Gambia	2
Georgia	2
Ghana	34
Hong Kong	6
Hong Kong (holder of special admin region passport	2
India	425
Indonesia	2
Japan	10
Jordan	2
Kenya	11
Korea	1
Korea (South)	5
Kryrgyzstan	1
Lebanon	1
Libya	1
Malawi	4
Malaysia	47
Maldives	47
Mauritius	4
Mexico	1
Mongolia	2
Morocco	1
Namibia	1
Nepal	11
Nicaragua	1
Nigeria	141
Pakistan	57
Palestine	1
Panama	1
Philippines	1
Romania	3
Russia	7
Rwanda	1
Saudi Arabia	1
Sierra Leone	2
Singapore	6
South Africa	4
Sri Lanka	10
Sudan	5
Swaziland	2
Syria	2
Taiwan	14
Tanzania	4
Thailand	1
Turkey	2
Uganda	4
Ukraine	1
United States	72
Uzbekistan	3
Venezuela	4
Vietnam	1
Zambia	2
Zimbabwe	14

 

The Health Departmentsponsors and funds the Tribunal. The Department works with the Mental HealthTribunal Administration (an Executive Agency) to ensure the efficient andeffective delivery of tribunals.

TheTribunal will produce its first annual report (covering the initial six monthsof operation) in June 2006 and has already produced a statistical report of itsfirst quarter which will be published on its website. The information from thefirst six months of operation will be used to identify key performance targetsagainst which the quality and efficiency of the Tribunal Service will bemeasured. These will include response times, number of hearings required todetermine cases and the cost per hearing. Based on these measures, targets willbe set for 2006-07 and performance against these regularly reported to ministers.

Additionally, the tribunal willwork with the Health Department in itscommissioned study into the operation of the tribunal, the tasks whichdifferent professional groups complete as part of the process and the time contributionsmade. The study will report in autumn 2006.

Since the establishment of the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland there have been no cases where the tribunal has been unable to provide a panel to hear an application.