Received: 3 September 2024

1.Does the PFEW endorse Martis Media to manage Facebook pages on behalf of local offices?

2. Is there due diligence on the posts/information that is shared on those groups? ie company discounts, are these legitimate companies?

3.Does any contract with Martis Media include the need to ensure that Police Officers who sign up to the groups are aware that the group is not in fact private, is run by an external media company and that personal information should not be shared.

4. Does the PFEW also endorse unidentifiable profiles being a part of those groups under the management of Martis Media?

5. The instruction of a media company for National and Local Federation communication is funded by member subscriptions I believe, how much has this cost members nationally and locally?

Responded: 22 November 2024

1. The Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) HQ does not endorse Martis Media to manage Facebook pages on behalf of local offices?

2. PFEW HQ does not hold this information.

3. PFEW HQ does not hold this information.

4. The PFEW HQ does not endorse unidentifiable profiles being a part of those groups under the management of Martis Media

5. The PFEW engages with a number of professional communication advisors both nationally and locally. PFEW relies on Section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("FOIA"). Namely that the disclosure of this information would be prejudicial to the commercial interests of the PFEW. This position is taken on the basis that:

• There is an intention to run a tender/RFP process for external communications advisors in the near future.
• Were details of amounts paid to individual communications advisors to be made public, then this information would be accessible to external agencies contemplating participating in the tender/RFP process prior to them submitting their pricing proposals. This would weaken the PFEW's position in this process and therefore prejudice its commercial interests.
• Whilst there is a public interest in details of the PFEW's general expenditure being made public (and which is made public via the PFEW's published accounts), to the extent that there is any public interest in the specific amounts paid to communication advisors, this is outweighed by the public interest in the PFEW being able to conduct its search for new communications advisors free from commercial prejudice, and to obtain fair value from its advisors, in a way that a normal commercial party would be able to.