Thursday, 15 November 2012
THE BRITISH ACADEMY AND GILES FRAZER
Arsenal FC help British Academy launch first ever Language Week
British Academy recieves annual grant from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
The British Academy is the United Kingdom's national body for the humanities and the social sciences. Its purpose is to inspire, recognise and support excellence in the humanities and social sciences, throughout the UK and internationally, and to champion their role and value.
It receives an annual grant from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). In 2010-11 it had a gross income of £31,050,878, including £26,447,813 from BIS. £25,380,379 was distributed during the year in research grants, awards and charitable activities.[1]
The British Academy was established in 1902 and received its Royal Charter in the same year. It is now a fellowship of more than 900 leading scholars spanning all disciplines across the humanities and social sciences. The Academy is a self-governing and independent registered charity, based at 10-11 Carlton House Terrace in London.
It is not to be confused with the British Academy of Film and Television Arts or the Royal Academy.
"Award of prizes
The President's Medal rewards signal service to the cause of the humanities and social sciences.
The British Academy awards a total of 12 Prizes and Medals, most of them awarded annually. These include the Wiley Prize for Psychology, founded in 2009; the Peter Townsend Policy Press Prize, created in 2011; and the British Academy President’s Medal, created in 2010 and awarded to up to five recipients each year who have demonstrated “signal service to the cause of the humanities and social sciences”.
The Rt Hon Lord Mandelson
First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and Lord President of the Council
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Hello, I enjoy reading all of your аrticle pοst.
I lіke to write а little comment to support you.
Also visit my web page :: tax accountant
I ԁon't even know how I stopped up here, however I assumed this publish used to be great. I do not recognise who you might be but definitely you're gоіng tο а
well-κnoωn blοggeг if you hаρpen to arеn't already. Cheers!
Take a look at my webpage :: leonardo dicaprio
Thank you for any other gгeat article. Where else mаy just anуone
gеt that type of information in ѕuch an
ideal manner of writing? I hаve a pгеѕentation subsequent weеk, аnd I'm at the search for such information.
My blog post ... finance Employment
Oh mу goodnеѕѕ! Incrediblе artісle ԁude!
Thank you so muсh, Howeveг I am expеriеncing problеms wіth
youг RSS. I don't understand why I am unable to join it. Is there anybody having the same RSS problems? Anyone that knows the answer can you kindly respond? Thanks!!
Here is my site - degree in psychology
Hmm іt apρeaгs like уοur blog ate my
first comment (it was supeг long) so I guеsѕ I'll just sum it up what I submitted and say, I'm thoroughly enjoying your blog.
I too am an aspiring blog blogger but I'm still new to the whole thing. Do you have any tips for rookie blog writers? I'd definіtеly apprecіatе it.
Here is my web blog : now
Τhis is a topic whіch іs nеar to my heart.
.. Cheeгs! Εxactly where are
your contact details though?
Feel free to visit my web blog ... home remedies to to get rid of dark circles under eye
I have published the above six comments only to show everyone the pathetic spamming/stalking shit I am having chucked at me.
GF was on that R4 Moral Maze Lord McAlpine love-in on the moral code of the internet this week. Worth listening to.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01ntgw5
Made me want to vomit. "real journalism.." well, you won't find the truth in the MSM. Thank heaven for the internet. GF was the least nauseous of the quintet by a long way, I hasten to say.
BTW Zoompad, thanks so much for the 2002 Select committee link. The previous page was fascinating. A very interesting trio who deserve scrutiny.
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/levison-enquiry-fiona-fox-science-media-centre-gives-evidence-includes-mmr-and-xmrv.14340/
WHAT THE HECK?????
Yes, the 2002 Select Committee, what gets me is why David Cameron is so shy of his involvement in it.
The Charity Commission paid a lawyer to avoid answering my FOI about the little club some of those who were involved ie Richard Webster, the British False Memory Society. Did you see this?
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_bfms#incoming-285452
From: Barbara Richards
13 January 2011
Dear Charity Commission for England and Wales,
I am very concerned about the BFMS Registered Charity No: 1040683
Please can you provide me with the details of the people who
applied for this organisation to recieve charitable status, and who
granted it, plus the dates?
Yours faithfully,
Barbara Richards
From: Web Enquiries
Charity Commission for England and Wales
13 January 2011
Thank you for your email to the Charity Commission.
We aim to give you a full and clear response within fifteen working days
from receipt of your email. We will ensure that our response is both
accurate and appropriate.
...
From: RTN Registration Applications
Charity Commission for England and Wales
31 January 2011
Dear Ms. Richards
Thank you for your email of 13 January 2011 (copy below), concerning the
British False Memory Society (Registered Charity No: 1040683).
You have requested details of the people who applied for this organisation
to receive charitable status, and who granted it, plus the dates.
The organisation was registered by the Charity Commission on 9 September
1994.
The entry on the register of charities is available on our website
([1]www.charitycommission.gov.uk). This provides the name and address of
the current correspondent for the charity.
I am unable to provide details of the names of the individuals involved
with the original application. This information is exempt under section
40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act. This provides that information
is exempt where it is personal information relating to a third party.
Disclosure of this information would contravene the principles of the
Data Protection Act 1998.
From: Barbara Richards
22 February 2012
Dear RTN Registration Applications,
I am not happy with this decision. I would have replied before but
struggle with PTSD on account of being a survivor of child abuse
and persecution of authorities desperate to cover up the Pindown
child abuse scandal.
Ralph Underwager was one of the men who set up the British False
Memory Society, and he expressed strong endorsement for paedophilia
in a sex magazine interview called Paidika. The BFMS has been
involved in the discrediting of police institutional child abuse
investigations, and lobbied Parliament to try to limit police
powers to conduct investigations of abuse, therefore I think it is
in the public interest to be given disclosure on who set up this
charity.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Richards
From: Registration Applications
Charity Commission for England and Wales
22 February 2012
Dear Sir / Madam
Thank you for your email.
A member of our Registration team will contact you within the next 15
working days.
Thank you
Registration Division
From: Litigation & Review
Charity Commission for England and Wales
2 March 2012
Dear Ms Richards
Review of the Commission's response to your request for information under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for your email which we received on 22 February 2012 in which
you asked the Commission to review its decision not to supply some or all
of the information you requested under the Freedom of Information Act
2000. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your
request.
The review will be conducted by a Commission lawyer, Louise Platt, who
will consider your request for information afresh. The review will
consider whether our original response was correct in the circumstances
and whether there are any factors that enable us to release the
information you have requested, either in full or in part. Further
information about our decision review service can be found on our website
using the following link:
[1]www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Library/about_us/decision_review.pdf
The section about Freedom of Information Decision Reviews can be found on
page 17 onwards.
We aim to complete reviews of Freedom of Information decisions within 20
working days, unless there are exceptional circumstances. In this case,
we aim to complete our review and issue a response to you by 22 March
2012. However, we will contact you again if this timescale is likely to
change.
I trust you will find the attached information helpful, but if you have
any questions about the review, please do contact me.
Yours sincerely
Ann Marshalsea
Litigation & Review Support Officer
Charity Commission Direct
PO Box 1227, Liverpool, L69 3UG
Madeline Greenhalgh left an annotation (14 March 2012)
Dear Requester,
I would like to personally reassure you that Ralph Underwager did not have any part whatsoever in the setting up or running of the BFMS. As far as I know he lived and worked in America and never in the UK.
We were made aware of the statements to which you refer when they were made back in 1993 and do not condone or agree with his comments. We have a disclaimer on our website to reiterate that point. (www.bfms.org.uk)
We have not lobbied Parliament to limit police powers to conduct investigations of abuse nor had any involvement in discrediting of police institutional child abuse investigations. We acknowledge and abhor the fact that there are many genuine cases of child abuse that require the application of the criminal law.
Madeline Greenhalgh
Director
BFMS
Barbara Richards left an annotation (14 March 2012)
Dear Madeline Greenhalgh,
You have not personally reassured me of anything.
Ralph Underwager was certainly involved in the BFMS, and the BFMS has tried to distance itself from Ralph Underwager, since he made those disgraceful comments for that Dutch sex magazine. I can well understand why the BFMS would want to do that.
Whilst he was alive Ralph Underwager repeatedly advised his followers to be bold, and they have certainly heeded his advice.
It is dreadful for child abuse victims to have to put up with being persecuted, plotted against and called disgraceful names by devotees of False Memory Syndrome. False Memory Syndrome has to be one of the cruelest methods of psychological torture ever invented.
Members of the BFMS have certainly been lobbying Parliament to prevent the UK police from doing their duty in investigating the Pindown child abuse, and the evidence for that is in Hansard.
I prefer to wait for the charity commission to give their answer on this matter than take your response as the truth Madeline Greenhalgh.
From: Platt, Louise
Charity Commission for England and Wales
22 March 2012
Dear Ms Richards
I am writing further to my colleague Ann Marshalsea’s letter of 2 March.
I am one of the Commission’s legal advisors and I am conducting a review
of the Commission’s response to your request under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) dated 13 January.
In carrying out this review I am considering whether several exemptions
apply including exemptions such as s.40(2) (disclosure of personal
information) and s.38 (health and safety) which requires that the public
interest in disclosure or withholding be considered. I have not yet
concluded this consideration. The Commission's Final Decision processes
and FOIA oblige the Commission to respond to requests promptly and I have
aimed to do this in this case and within 20 working days, however, this
has not been achievable. Both our FDT process and FOIA allow the
Commission to extend the timescale for making the decision by a reasonable
period in order to allow proper consideration, and in this case I estimate
that I will be able to complete this consideration by 30 March. If it
becomes apparent that I will be unable to meet this deadline I will let
you know promptly.
If you think my decision to extend the deadline is wrong you have a right
to appeal to the Information Commissioner at The Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9
5AF.
From: Barbara Richards
26 March 2012
Dear Platt, Louise,
Thank you for explaining what you are doing. I do hope you will
base your decision on disclosure of information on the protection
and safety of the children of the UK rather than using legal
loopholes to protect people who may be a danger to children.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Richards
From: Louise Platt
Charity Commission for England and Wales
30 March 2012
Dear Ms Richards,
I am writing further to my email of 22 March.
Unfortunately, I am not yet in a position to finally conclude whether the
information you have requested that the Commission holds can be
disclosed.
I appreciate that the information that you have requested relates to
issues that are important to you, and for that reason I want to fully
explore all the legal issues surrounding this disclosure before I complete
this review, to ensure that I can properly consider the legal position and
whether the public interest lies in disclosing this information.
I therefore propose to extend the deadline again, to 27 April. I
appreciate that this is a long extension, but I am on leave for two of
those weeks. However, in light of the work I have already done on this
matter I do not feel that it would be appropriate to hand the matter to
someone else. I will endeavour to complete the review and let you have my
final decision before that date.
As I mentioned in my last email, if you think my decision to extend the
deadline is wrong you have a right to appeal to the Information
Commissioner at The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House,
Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
From: Barbara Richards
30 March 2012
Dear Louise Platt,
I feel quite shocked about the delay in providing this information,
because I don't think I have asked for anything unreasonable, and
feel strongly that this information is certainly in the public
interest. I cannot see any reason why this information should be
withheld, or that legal advice should be necessary.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Richards
From: Louise Platt
Charity Commission for England and Wales
30 March 2012
Thank you for your email.
I am out of the office on leave, returning on Monday 16th April. If your
matter is urgent please contact Jane McGarry at
[email address] or Elise Millington at
[email address]
Kind regards,
Louise Platt
From: Barbara Richards
20 April 2012
Dear Louise Platt,
It is now the 20th April, and I would like a response to my request
for information about the BFMS.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Richards
From: Louise Platt
Charity Commission for England and Wales
20 April 2012
Thank you for your email.
I am out of the office on Friday 20th April, returning on Monday 23rd
April. If your matter is urgent please contact Elise Millington at
[email address] or Jane McGarry at
[email address].
Kind regards,
Louise Platt
From: Louise Platt
Charity Commission for England and Wales
23 April 2012
Dear Ms Richards,
I am sorry that this decision review has taken much longer to deal with than was first anticipated. As I explained in my last email, if you consider that my decision to extend the deadline was unreasonable you can contact the Information Commissioner.
In my email that I sent you on 30 March, in which I explained why I would have to extend the deadline again, I said that I would complete the review by 27 April, which is Friday of this week. Given that you have had to wait a long time to receive the Commission's response to your request for a decision review, it is my priority to meet this deadline and I will contact you again as soon as possible this week and in any event by Friday with my response.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely,
Louise Platt
Legal Services Division
Charity Commission
From: Barbara Richards
23 April 2012
Dear Louise Platt,
Thank you for your reply. I have already waited quite a long time
for the information, and can certainly wait a few more days, I do
have a lot of patience, us Pindown survivors do tend develop
patience as a virtue, as we often have to have to wait a long time
for answers and explainations for why were were treated so badly as
children.
I am not on a witch hunt against the Charity Commission, I simply
want to do my bit in keeping children safe in the UK. I just do not
want any child to go through what I went through as a child.
Since posting this FOI I have discovered very clear links between
the BFMS and the FMSF. Please, I do urge you, put aside your
lawyers caution when responding to this request, and do what it
right for the protection of the children of this country. I would
never blame the Charity Commission for being decieved by bad
people, but the thing to do now is to do what is right.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Richards
Dear Ms Richards,
Please find attached a letter containing the Commission's final decision
in relation to your request for information concerning the British False
Memory Society.
I am aware that it has taken me quite a long time to carry out this review
and I thank you for your patience.
Kind regards,
Louise Platt
Louise Platt
Legal Services Division
Charity Commission
Our Ref:
104068313477351LP-Legal
Date:
27 April 2012
Dear Ms Richards
FOl Decision Review - British False Memory Society
This letter sets out the final decision of the Charity Commission ("the Commission") on your
request for information about the British False Memory Society ("BFMS").
I am one of the Commission's legal advisors and I have conducted this review on behalf of the
Commission.
Issue
The review of an initial decision by the Commission to withhold certain information under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("FOIA").
Background
On 13 January 2011 you wrote to the Commission about the BFMS and asked the Commission to
provide you with "the details of the people who applied for this organisation to receive charitable
status and who granted it, plus the dates".
On 31 January 2012 the Commission informed you that the organisation was registered on 9
September 1994 and referred you to a link to the entry about the charity in the Central Register of
Charities on the Commission's website. The letter also stated that the Commission is unable to
provide details of the individuals involved with the original application as the information is personal
data of a third party and is therefore exempt from disclosure under s40(2) of the FOIA as to release
the personal data would contravene the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998.
On 22 February 2012 you wrote to the Commission to express your dissatisfaction with the
decision and explain why you consider it is in the public interest for the information to be disclosed.
In particular you indicated in this letter that you were particularly concerned that an individual called
Ralph Underwager may have been involved in setting up the BFMS.
Information Held
Dates
You have already been informed of the date on which the BFMS was registered as a charity, which
is 9 September 1994.
The Commission also holds the date on which the original Application Form for registration as a
charity was signed, and the date on which the application was received by the Charity
Commission.
Names
The Commission has a general policy to keep documents for only 5 years after they are received
by the Commission and destroy them after that period. It is therefore unusual for us to hold
information about the registration of a charity more than 5 years after it was registered. However,
in this case we do still hold some information about the registration application.
The Commission holds the name of the individual who signed the Application Form for registration
as a charity on behalf of the BFMS, the name of an individual who (along with the person who
submitted the Application Form) signed an amended version of the constitution of BFMS on 1
September 1994 (during the registration process), and the name of the member of Commission
staff who sent the letter to the BFMS confirming that it had been registered as a charity.
The Decision
Dates
I find that I agree with the decision to release to you the date on which the BFMS was registered as
a charity. However, I consider that the Commission also holds more information about dates that
potentially fall within the scope of your request. I find that the Commission should have released
the dates to you.
I confirm that the Application Form for registration as a charity sent by the BFMS was signed on 11
July 1994 and was received by the Commission on 19 July 1994.
Names
Before I set out my conclusions regarding the Commission's decision on this part of your request, I
would like to address your particular concern relating to the involvement of an individual called
Ralph Underwager in the application for the registration of the BFMS as a charity. I have looked at
all the information the Commission holds about the registration of the BFMS as a charity, and I can
confirm that there is nothing in the information we hold which indicates that anyone by the name of
Ralph Underwager was involved in the registration application.
I find that the Commission's original decision to withhold the information we hold about the name of
the individual who signed an amended version of the constitution and the name of the member of
Commission staff involved in the registration was correct. However, the decision to withhold thename of the individual who submitted the application for registration was not correct. I also
consider that the Commission should have given you more information about the number of names
that we hold that fall within the scope of your request. I have set out this information above in the
section of this letter on "Information Held".
Since you made your request for a decision review it has come to my attention that the individual
who signed the original Application Form for registration of the BFMS as a charity is now
deceased. This impacts on the decision to withhold the information from you. This is because the
information was originally withheld on the basis that to release it would breach the data protection
principles in the Data Protection Act 1998 ("DPA"). Where an individual is deceased their personal
data is no longer protected under the DPA.
In this circumstance I can release to you the name of this individual. The trustee who signed the
Application Form for registration of BFMS as a charity is Denis Royston.
I uphold the Commission's decision to withhold the name of the individual who signed the
constitution which was amended at the time of the registration and the name of the member of
Commission staff who signed the letter informing the BFMS that it had been registered as a
charity.
This information constitutes personal data. It is personal data because it falls within the definition
set out in the DPA which is that it relates to a living person, and that person must be identifiable.
Personal data is exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) of the FOIA if disclosure would
breach one of the data protection principles set out in the DPA. If one of the data protection
principles are breached, then the exemption is absolute meaning that the Commission does not
have to go on to consider the public interest test.
The first data principle is that personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully. The data is
considered to be fairly processed if at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 of the Data
Protection Act is met.
• The individuals concerned have not given consent to disclosure;
• Disclosure is not necessary to perform a contract between the Commission and the
individual concerned or in order to enter into such a contract at the individual's request;
• Disclosure is not necessary to comply with a legal obligation. Section 40(3)(b) explains that
the general obligation to disclose under FOI is to be ignored in this analysis;
• Disclosure is not necessary to protect the vital interests of the individual concerned;
• Disclosure is not necessary for the administration of justice or for the discharge of the
Commission's public functions.
• Disclosure is not necessary for you to pursue your legitimate interests and it would be an
unwarranted prejudice to the individual's rights.
I do not consider that in disclosing the personal data to you any of the conditions in Schedule 2
would be satisfied and therefore it would be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 to provide
you with the information requested.I have given particular consideration to whether the name of the member of Commission staff
should be disclosed, and have concluded that it should not. The Information Commissioner's
Office (ICO) has produced practical guidance on when names of staff should be released in
response to a request for information. The guidance confirms that the main consideration is
whether it would be fair to identify an individual and this must be considered on a case by case
basis.
The personal information relates to an employee of the Commission who was employed at the time
of the registration.
I consider that the individual would not expect their name to be released in this way, in response to
a request for information. The terms and conditions of the employment of Charity Commission staff
provide reassurance that personal information will not generally be given to third parties without the
permission of individuals. The individual has not consented to the release of the information and is
no longer employed by the Commission so it would be difficult to obtain their consent. Given that
the registration took place a number of years ago and the individual is no longer employed by the
Commission, I consider the individual would have no expectation that their name might be
disclosed to the public in this context. However, the Commission does acknowledge that it cannot
evade its responsibilities under the Act and it must consider whether disclosure is fair and lawful,
whether permission is given or not.
The ICO guidance recognises that the presumption is in favour of protecting privacy and release of
personal information is only fair if there is a genuine reason to disclose. Even if you have a
legitimate interest to pursue, it is likely to prejudice the rights of the individual concerned to release
the information to you. The individual may be subject to unwarranted attention and there is a risk of
detriment to their privacy.
I conclude that the Commission was right to withhold the names of the individual who signed the
constitution and the member of Commission staff who wrote the letter informing the BFMS that it
was registered as a charity.
Conclusion
I uphold the Commission's decision in part. I have found that some additional information should
be disclosed to you. This information is set out above.Next Steps
If you remain unhappy with this response you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner
for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
• enquiriesAico.psi.gov.uk
Yours sincerely
Ms Louise Platt
Legal Services Division
THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE!
I am a victim of the Staffordshire Pindown child abuse. I know I sound like a broken record keep pointing this out, but what I am trying to get at is that I don't have a massive team of legal experts to wade through all this legal jargon, I am just a woman who is struggling to survive the horrible abuse and malicious vindictive persecution I have been subjected to for years.
The Charity Commission is not fit for purpose. Charity is a Biblical term, its supposed to be about helping other people, kindness, alleviating suffering, that sort of thing.
WHAT THE BLINKING HECK ARE THEY PAYING LAWYERS TO AVOID ANSWERING AWKWARD QUESTIONS THAT A SURVIVOR OF INSTITUTIONAL CHILD ABUSE IS ASKING ABOUT A CHARITY THAT HAS BEEN SET UP BY A BUNCH OF CREEPS WHOSE SOLE OBJECTIVE IS TO DISCREDIT POLICE INVESTIGATIONS INTO INSTITUTIONAL CHILD ABUSE AND ATTACK AND BULLY VICTIMS OF INSTITUTIONAL CHILD ABUSE?
Lord McAlpine thinks he is hard done by. He wants to take a hike in my shoes, if he wants to know what true suffering is like.
I have had the Orees ganging up on me, for two years they viciously put the boot in, called me vile names, called me a man hating lesbian, because I exposed two horrible American perverts called Richard Gardner and Ralph Underwager.
The BBC has tried its best to cover up the Pindown child abuse scandal. Ceri Thomas sent one of his female drones to spy on me on this very blog, the snooping cow came creeping and sniffing round me, pretending to be wanting information about NAPAC, but it soon became crystal clear what she was really sniffing around for.
Ceri Thomas is the latest BBC cover up merchant, heaven knows why he is doing it, but none of them will succeed, this filth is never going to be swept under the carpet ever again.
May God forgive them, and that is a heartfelt prayer, because what they are doing is so evil, how are they going to avoid eternal damnation when the Lord comes to judge the quick and the dead, iunless they repent?
Thanks Zoompad.
Absolutely astonishing.
Post a Comment