Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
REQUEST
1. Please state how much Mobinocco was paid for contributions to the OIFR app.
2. Please share any contracts between the South Wales Police and Mobinocco in relation to development.
3. In response to the Crime Commissioner's annual report for 2022 (ref. p.70) please provide the full "review of the pilot" for the OIFR app.
4. Please also include the dates of any transactions to Mobinocco (Mobile Innovations Limited) relating to the OIFR app.
RESPONSE
We consulted with our DSD (Digital Services Division) who have provided the below response to your request.
Question 1
Your request for this information has been considered and we are not obliged to supply this. The following exemption applies:
Section 43(2) – Commercial Interest
Section 43 is a qualified class-based exemption which requires the authority to consider the public interest in disclosure.
Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000, the commercial interest exemption (S.43) states that information is exempt information if it constitutes a trade secret or if its disclosure under the FOIA would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person.
A disclosure in response to a Freedom of Information request is not a disclosure to the individual applicant but a release into the public domain. Publicly disclosing this information would be likely to prejudice their ability to successfully engage in a competitive market by allowing competing firms access to strategic commercial and business information which has been provided in confidence to South Wales Police. This would give an unfair advantage to competitors in submitting and negotiating future tenders with South Wales Police or other public bodies.
With regards to South Wales Police’s own commercial interest, we consider that disclosure would or would likely prejudice South Wales Police’s business reputation and confidence that suppliers, contracting parties and investors may have.
This would have a detrimental impact and threaten South Wales Police’s ability to successfully participate in commercial activity, in particular the ability to negotiate best value terms of contract in the best interest of South Wales Police and the public.
Public Interest Test
Factors Favouring Disclosure
Disclosing the requested information would promote openness and transparency in relation to commercial duties and may contribute to public debate.
Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
The police service has a moral duty to protect the sensitive commercial information it holds about any private company it has dealings with. Disclosure would be likely to prejudice the commercial interest of the company involved and affect future procurement for the Force as the information has been provided to us in confidence and is of a commercially sensitive nature. Disclosure is also likely to damage the relationship between South Wales Police and the supplier involved. This may in the future reduce the number of companies tendering therefore reducing the opportunities for South Wales Police to secure the best value.
Balancing Test
Before deciding which of these arguments is most compelling, a balancing test needs to be completed. In this case, the key factor favouring non-disclosure is the interest of third parties and this needs to be weighed against the key factor favouring disclosure which concerns transparency.
While is it accepted that accountability and demonstrating transparency in the use of public funds is a strong factor favouring disclosure, in this case the requested information concerns the potential disclosure of information which would be detrimental to a supplier’s ability to compete fairly when bidding for future tender opportunities.
I have therefore determined that greater weight must be given to protecting the commercial interests of the third party and South Wales Police in this instance. On balance currently the public interest test does not favour disclosure.
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a refusal notice for this part of your request.
Question 2 & 4
South Wales Police have no contract for development with Mobinocco, we approach them on a case by case basis for development work.
Question 3
Please find attached document entitled ‘OIFR Trial results report’, this is the statistical report of the findings and feedback from those who used the app.