Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Cabinet Office on 24 September (HC20665) and the Written Answer by the Minister of State in the Cabinet Office on 17 July (HC18049), whether there are other properties and public bodies in Greater Manchester that were omitted from the Written Answer HC18049 other than GCHQ in Heron House.

The response provided in relation to HC18049 included a list of Government occupancies across Greater Manchester. On review the GPA is unable to provide a list of Government departments occupying specific sites. In some instances the location of individual departments can be accessed online: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations.

While location details for individual departments are accessible online via GOV.UK, the Government Property Agency (GPA) cannot provide a comprehensive list of all government occupiers at specific sites. Confirming or denying the occupancy of specific sites, or releasing exhaustive site-level occupier lists, engages Section 24(2) (Safeguarding National Security) and Section 38 (Health and Safety) of the Freedom of Information Act.

Section 24(2) provides an exemption from the duty to confirm or deny whether information is held, where the exemption is required for the purposes of safeguarding national security. This exemption is also subject to the public interest test. Disclosing lists for standard sites whilst withholding or refusing to confirm occupier details for sites occupied by highly sensitive departments would allow individuals to assemble piecemeal information (the 'mosaic effect') and deduce the presence of sensitive government functions. Taking into account all circumstances, the public interest in maintaining national security and protecting site occupants significantly outweighs the public interest in disclosing site-specific occupier lists.

The exemption in Section 38 is also a qualified exemption and we have considered whether the balance of the public interest favours releasing or withholding this information. There is a general public interest in disclosure of information and we recognise that openness in government may increase public trust in and engagement with the government. These public interests have been weighed against a strong public interest in protecting the safety/physical or mental health of individuals. Disclosing details regarding all organisations occupying a specific location would create a tangible risk to the health and safety of individuals working there. There is a strong public interest in ensuring that public servants and site occupants can perform their duties in a safe and secure environment, free from the threat of personal endangerment or disruption to their physical and mental well-being

Taking into account all the circumstances of this case, we have concluded that the balance of the public interest favours withholding this information.