25-26/010

We refer to your information request of 22 May 2025, made in the following terms:

I refer to the PSA report of the review of GTCS fitness to Teach processes published today. I note that at paragraph 3.7 the PSA say:  

We have not looked at every aspect of the Fitness to Teach (conduct) process, but instead have focused on where we felt able to make constructive suggestions within the scope and time as commissioned by GTCS. This means we have not been able to comment on all of the matters that were raised with us by stakeholders. We have however provided GTCS with a summary of all points where these have not been covered.  

Please could you send me a copy of that summary provided to you by the PSA?

We have dealt with your information request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA).

We confirm that we hold information falling within the scope of your request. We attach a copy of some of the requested information from the summary document provided to us by the PSA, labelled ‘FOI 25-26-010-Records'.

However, we have withheld other requested information from you on the basis of exemptions contained in Part 2 of FOISA. The exemptions we have claimed are explained below.

We have redacted in black some of the information contained in the summary document under section 30(c) of FOISA. This is because we consider that disclosure of this information in the circumstances of the PSA review, into the public domain, would substantially prejudice the ability of GTC Scotland to conduct its public affairs in the future. Obtaining free and frank expression of views from voluntary participants as part of a consultation or review requires them to be given certain assurances about what will happen to that information in the future.

In this case, participants were given assurances about a certain level of privacy, even in terms of the PSA sharing personal details with GTC Scotland. Disclosure of some of the information falling within the scope of your request would be likely to significantly prejudice our ability to undertake, or partake in, consultations and reviews in the future, through a ‘chilling effect’ on future participants. We consider it likely that voluntary participants in future stakeholder consultations would be less frank and open in their comments if they had a reasonable expectation, based on our previous course of action, that their comments would be placed in the public domain.  

The exemption in section 30(c) of FOISA is subject to a test of the public interest in maintaining that exemption, balanced against the public interest in disclosing the information. FOISA does not define the public interest, but it has been described as something which is of serious concern and benefit to the public, not merely something of individual interest. It has also been described as something that is in the interest of the public, not merely of interest to the public, i.e. it serves the interests of the public.

With this in mind, we recognise that there is a general public interest in public authorities, including regulatory bodies, making information accessible to the public to enhance public scrutiny of decision-making processes and to improve accountability and participation. We also recognise a public interest in disclosing information which would contribute to ensuring that a public authority with regulatory responsibilities is adequately discharging its functions.

However, balanced against those public interest considerations in disclosure, we note that GTC Scotland is a body that is funded by the teaching profession in relation to its core functions, and not a body funded from the public purse, so there is no public interest in disclosing the use of funds in relation to obtaining value for money.  We consider that the public interest in ensuring that the GTC Scotland is adequately discharging its functions is already met through means other than the disclosure of the information withheld under section 30(c). The PSA report itself, commissioned by GTC Scotland, is a key mechanism for achieving that purpose and that has already been published. In order to ensure that the PSA report, and future such reports, are as effective as possible in reviewing GTC Scotland’s performance of its functions, a private space is required for stakeholder consultation on sensitive matters to ensure such a review receives frank and honest input from those best placed to provide input and comments to such a report. Disclosing the small amount of information falling within the scope of the s30(c) exemptions would significantly harm our ability to review the adequacy of the discharge of our regulatory functions.

Overall, taking into account all relevant considerations, we consider that the public interest is far better served by maintaining the application of the section 30(c) exemption in this case to certain information falling within the scope of your request, than by releasing that information.

We have also redacted in red some of the information contained in the summary document under the exemption in section 38(1)(b) of FOISA (read with section 38(2A)(a)) because we consider that individuals could be identified from that data indirectly and that disclosure of this data into the public domain would be a breach of the first data protection principle. Such disclosure would be unfair in terms of the UK GDPR (Article 5(1)(a)) and therefore unlawful. The exemption in section 38(1)(b) is not subject to the public interest test under FOISA.

If you are dissatisfied with how we have dealt with your information request, you may contact informationgovernance@gtcs.org.uk to request GTC Scotland conduct a review of this response. You should describe the original request and explain why you are dissatisfied. You have 40 working days from receipt of this response to submit a review request to us. When the review process has been completed, if you are still dissatisfied, you can apply to the Scottish Information Commissioner for a decision in this case under section 47 of FOISA. Details of how to do that can be found on the Scottish Information Commissioner’s website.