Is this the same Jones that planed to
avoid FOI request before he got any, the same one that asked others to detail information related to an FOI request, or some other PhIl Jones working at CRU?
I think it is because Phil Jones asked others to delete their emails to try to
avoid the FOI request — and Phil Johns is from UEA.
Despite endless discussion and Cabinet Secretary Gus O'Donnell's rather creative warning that officials are «working on Brexit plans in their head» to
avoid FOI, we found the chilling effect to be a myth (as did a Parliamentary committee).
I agreed with you that
avoiding the FOI of CRU and NASA were serious.
Not exact matches
It's being touted as more smoking gun evidence that UEA's Jones and colleagues working in climate science conspired to cover up data, engineer which papers made it through peer review, and, most damningly,
avoid Freedom of Information (
FOI) requests.
Andy, think long and hard about what you've said here and ask yourself how climate scientists can
avoid to appear to be engaged in nefarious activities when subjected to quote - mining, selective publication of stolen e-mails, outright misrepresentation of public statements, organized
FOI flooding meant to overwhelm a departments resources to respond (while asking for stuff the university in question has no right to release), etc etc..
Actually, Angliss, it turns out that the reason that all the emails aren't available to provide a full context is that East Anglia has gone to extraordinary and, by some accounts Prima Facie illegal efforts to
avoid satisfying
FOI requests.
I quite like Phil jones's work, in fact one of his books is on my Christmas present list (hint) The basic point as I understand it from Willis was that Jones deliberately
avoided responding to a
FOI request.
A few of the emails discuss ways to
avoid responding to
FOI requests.
They further demonstrate that he was happy to have those agreements as an excuse to willfully
avoid his obligations under the
FOI rules.
And will show that the UEA's attempt to claim Muir Russell as a «public appointment» was just another subterfuge to
avoid compliance with an earlier
FOI request.