Now, this really does take the biscuit.
The Department of Continued and Sustained FAIL are threatening to take their ball away… no, it’s even sillier than that.
They’re trying to take their facts away.
They’re linking the existence of the satirical Badman Blog to the work of those brilliant people working away at official figures to demonstrate that Badman produced his figures in a monumental act of auto-proctological statistics.*
And so, they are reviewing the provision of FoI requests in light of the possibility that they may be used to "defame or vilify" the authors of the review.
Yes, they are witholding facts in case those facts are used to portray the author of a review (that claimed that monitoring was necessary, despite their being no evidence, on the grounds that some authority figures have "issues" for which their is no factual basis) in somewhat of a bad light.
I take it then that it is now policy that you can defame and villify a whole class of people on the basis of hearsay and deliberately manipulated figures, but that it is unacceptable to use facts to challenge that vilification.
Oh I forgot… in order to defame and vilify a whole class of people, you have to be working for the DCSF. Silly me.
*(And to those who doubt that, I say that any man who has spent a good portion of his life teaching science who then takes an unrepresentative sample, extracts the median value and then multiplies it unweighted across the whole class to obtain an aggregate figure, is not being merely disingenuous but actively misleading. Either he is too mendacious to be trusted with the review or incompetent. You see, unlike Mr Badman, I tend to vilify and defame people solely on the basis of clear evidence of their actions.)