Surely it would be covered by "commercial confidentiality" - the current excuse, sorry, reason 

They are sure to say it's a matter of National Security. After all, if Al Queda are going to phone, we may as well make them pay 8p/min... 

Try it out, make a request under FOI to, for example, the DVLA.  Let us know what their response is.

I note from the postings about DVLA that requests for disclosure of their geographical number(s) under the FOIA  has been made to them by others.

Await the outcome with interest.

Wow, idb what can I say but well done!

That is a prime example of the FOI Act working to get such a simple piece of information that was REPEATEDLY DENIED to you for various reasons. Indeed they were reasons which changed as they became aware that you knew more than you let on.

I would be interested to see what kind of information you are able to get about why they chose to use them. You *should* be able to ask the question straight out, perhaps ask for any reports which were created for executives, minutes of meetings regarding provisioning of telecoms services. Any commercially sensitive information would be removed, but it would almost certainly include income to the DVLA.

Gareth

78 reasons to argue when they tell you not to ring that number

Although not related to 0870, an interesting article nevertheless in today's Independent regarding the FOI Act. Full article at http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/story.jsp?story=606858

I'm surprised that the number of requests to date is so low.

>>>

Government attacked for 'hypocritical' attitude to Freedom of Information Act
By Robert Verkaik and Marie Woolf
02 February 2005


Ministers' promises to usher in a new age of freedom of information have failed to materialise, with scores of requests to open the Government to public scrutiny being rejected.

About 4,000 requests have been received across central government since the introduction of the Freedom of Information Act on 1 January. But MPs and journalists expressed frustration at the lack of positive responses to their requests ­ amid claims that the Government has breached its own legislation by failing to meet the Freedom of Information Act's statutory deadline.

Scores of requests have been refused and some departments have been using stock replies to deny access to information, issuing refusal letters to different people using identical wording.

Of the 70 inquiries made by The Independent only 10 have been successful. Almost half were turned down flat; the remainder are still awaiting reply.

In two of the replies the Government conceded that it had breached its own legislation by failing to meet the deadline of 20 working days that expired yesterday. Ministers also admitted they had no idea how many of the 362 requests made on the first day the legislation came into force had been answered. Yet, in 2000, Labour postponed the implementation of the Freedom of Information Act by four years to give government departments and 100,000 public bodies more time to prepare for the new right of access.

[...]

Of 4,000 requests received across central government, about half have been made by people identifying themselves as reporters. But campaigning organisations and members of the public have also made wide use of the new powers.

The National Archives has received the most requests, more than 600, followed by the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

[...]