(2) which companies were given access to the March 2004 edition of the Defence Export Services Organisation staff directory; on what basis such access was granted; and what restrictions were placed on the further circulation of this staff directory to other parties;
(3) what the security classification is of the March 2004 edition of the Defence Export Services Organisation staff directory.
Work associated with the appeal against the Information Commissioner’s decision in favour of disclosure of the 2004 staff directory for the Defence Export Services Organisation (DESO) is being carried out by staff from a number of areas within the Ministry of Defence. The majority of the effort rests with the directorate which leads on policy issues relating to operation of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, but staff within DESO itself, from the directorate of legal services and the security directorate are also involved. This work is a normal part of the function and responsibilities of these staff, and it is not possible to attribute costs specifically relating to this appeal. Senior Counsel for the Ministry of Defence in this case is Mr. Jonathan Crow QC, who is supported by Ms Kate Gallafent. Further support is being provided by a solicitor in the Treasury Solicitor’s Department. Information on the fees paid to Counsel in relation to this case is not recorded separately by the Department and it will take time to collate. I will write to the hon. Member when the figures are available.
The March 2004 edition of the DESO staff directory was widely circulated to the UK defence industry, to which nearly 2,000 copies were distributed. This edition, which did not carry a security classification, was distributed with no express restrictions on further circulation, unlike the most recent editions.