The code of data matching practice says that the Audit Commission will provide guidance on how to interpret the output of data matching exercises. It has denied providing guidance on how to investigate stating that this would be ultra vires. Ms Akram of the Commission has, however, said that there is nothing to prevent the Commission providing initial guidance on the selection of matches for investigation.
When I asked for a copy of this guidance it repeatedly refused on the basis that it provided guidance on how to investigate, and it even argued that since you could not investigate matches until you had interpreted them, then even the interpretation was part of the investigation. My request for guidance on how to 'interpret' the output of the data processing was, on this argument, itself, a request for guidance on 'how to investigate' and not even a redacted version of the document would be produced.
The response of the Commission caused its Independent Complaints Reviewer to comment that it gave rise to an unintended impression of duplicity.
According to the Audit Commission, "the document that Mrs XXXX refers to as a 'secret Audit Guide' deals with the results of the matching of the electoral register against council tax records, to help identify whether residents may be incorrectly receiving the Single Person Discount. It is a practical guide to assist participant authorities in investigating matches and it is not a legal document or a summary of the law relating to council tax discounts. "
This information was provided in a letter to Bob Neill, Under Secretary of State.
And it is clear from the redacted version that I have that the documents do provide guidance on how to investigate, and that they are legally outrageously wrong in the allegations made about taxpayers.
So the Audit Commission was not providing me with the truth when it denied providing guidance on how to investigate. It clearly was being duplicitous.
