A written answer shows 22 Freedom of Information cases in the Communications Directorate and 68 in special adviser processes had already passed 40 working days when ministers published the snapshot
Dozens of Home Office Freedom of Information responses were stuck beyond 40 working days in political or communications clearance, according to a written answer published this week — even though the Freedom of Information Act normally requires a response within 20 working days.
The figures came in reply to Rupert Lowe, the Restore Britain MP for Great Yarmouth, who asked how many proposed FOI responses were awaiting clearance from the Communications Directorate and from special advisers on 31 August, and how long each category had been waiting.
Policing and Crime Minister Sarah Jones said the Home Office is the largest recipient of FOI requests across central government and received over 8,700 in 2025. She published a snapshot, extracted and validated on 28 September, of cases inside the Communications Directorate and special adviser review processes.
Within the Communications Directorate review process, 16 cases were at up to 20 working days, two were at 21 to 40 days, and 22 had already passed more than 40 working days.
Cases awaiting consideration by special advisers stood at 12, nine and 15 in those same bands. A further group described as “within wider Special Adviser Referral Process” stood at 13, 34 and 53 — meaning 53 of those cases were already past 40 working days.
Add the over-40-day columns together and the snapshot shows 90 Home Office FOI cases delayed beyond twice the normal statutory period while sitting in communications or special adviser handling: 22 in the Communications Directorate, 15 awaiting SpAds, and 53 in the wider SpAd referral process.
That is the political revelation. The Home Office is not only wrestling with a huge FOI caseload. On the department’s own management figures, large numbers of answers are lingering inside the very clearance routes that sit closest to ministers’ media and political staff.
Ms Jones was careful to limit what the numbers prove. The table is a point-in-time snapshot of a relatively small share of overall FOI volume. The department says it does not routinely keep historical reports showing the stage reached inside the special adviser process on a given date. The figures are management information, not formally quality-assured official statistics.
Those caveats matter. They do not erase the awkward question for Labour.
Why are proposed FOI responses waiting so long for Communications Directorate or special adviser clearance that dozens have already blown past 40 working days?
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 sets a default of 20 working days for a public authority to respond. Departments can extend time in limited circumstances, for example when considering the public interest on a qualified exemption. Clearing a draft through communications or SpAds is not itself a statutory reason to park an answer for months.
Labour is now the Government. Special advisers work for ministers. The Home Office’s FOI performance, and the political handling of sensitive disclosures, sit with the current administration — not with whoever last redesigned the clearance flowchart.
None of this proves any individual request was suppressed, and the answer does not identify the subjects of the delayed cases. It does show a clearance bottleneck serious enough for Parliament to be told that 22 communications cases and 68 special adviser-process cases were already beyond 40 working days in a single validated snapshot.
For a government that talks about trust and delivery, that is a basic transparency test. If answers to the public are stacking up for clearance after the statutory clock has already run long, ministers need to say how many, why, and when the backlog will be cleared — with dates, not process language.
Image credit: UK Home Office / Flickr (CC BY 2.0) — 2 Marsham Street, Westminster.
