I’VE BEEN entertaining myself by having a look at the lists of Freedom of Information requests submitted to the Commons over the past few years.
Most of them, as you might expect, are for details on MPs’ expenses. Others are from people simply hoping the Commons authorities will carry out their research work for them. Many are sensible.
But some of them are simply bizarre. Below is a sample of them, with a summary of the request, the response and the date the response was made:
“Sexual orientation”? Who on earth would ask that, and who has the right to divulge that information other than the individual whose sexual orientation is being discussed?
The end of this request is cut off, so we don’t know what the requestor was going to ask after “and oblige”. But this is an example of someone who can’t be bothered having to trawl through Hansard himself. It’s also probably someone who thought Michael Martin called more Labour than opposition MPs at PMQs and wants the facts to substantiate his theories. in other words, someone who doesn’t understand how the Commons works; the Speaker always calls for questions from government and opposition benches alternately.
Hmm… fish!
Whoever said some FOI requests were intrusive?
Yes, those trees are leased. Don’t ask.
Someone obviously wants to know about my Barclay James Harvest collection.
MPs’ internet browsing habits?! And was that request rejected? Oh, it was… phew…!
Paper cuts? Seriously? That’s elf ‘n’ safety gone made, that is…
“MPs get to use soft toilet paper? At our expense? Just shows how out of touch they are, the blimmin’ troughers, etc, etc…” But seriously, someone actualy wasted seconds of their life submitting this request?