Posts Tagged ‘Gavin White Shell’

Dear Mr White

We safety received the Shell internal documents/emails and your covering letters, all delivered to us by motorbike messenger on Monday evening.

With reference to the documents and emails, we note that Shell has changed the method of censoring the information so that we sometimes have some visual clue to which parts have been removed. However, the censor appears to have got carried away with one Shell internal email, where even the date has been deleted.

All we can see is:

From:
To:
Cc:
Sent:
Subject: Re:

Donovan has posted a message that                                                      . There is no truth to this.

2

seems to have given rise to speculation among staff, and this is what Donovan seems to have picked up.

3

Bearing in mind that in answer to our SAR applications, Shell has supplied us with documents and emails stretching back into the 1990’s, it would be helpful if you would supply a date so that we can try to deduce the subject matter and therefore have the opportunity to correct any mistake regarding information attributed to us.

We also note that Shell is now camouflaging the uncensored text in an apparent effort to prevent copying and publication on the Internet. The censorship, camouflage and related cover-up tactics all designed to defeat transparency, are of course directly at odds with Shell’s claimed core business principles.

With regard to the Shell spying operation involving our website and over 100,000 Shell employees, I see that Shell (I assume Richard Wiseman) contacted the UK police on 10 December 2009 offering to ensure that “… enquiries are dealt with expeditiously”.

On the same subject (Shell Corporate Affairs Security spying), the following are extracts from email correspondence involving Shell and an unidentified person/party posing questions on the matter.

Some extracts:

Undated email with no information about sender or recipient (censored):

One email dated June this year appears to show Shell asked a privately funded anti-fraud agency, NCFTA, to target Donovan. Could you please comment?

Dated email with no information about identity of sender or recipient (censored)

Tuesday 1st December 2009
Subject: ncfta

Hi

The first email in the attachment appears to show a Shell employee asked NCFTA to monitor Donovan. I guess my questions are:

Are the emails attached genuine.
Did a Shell employee have discussions with National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance regarding Donovan
Did Shell give funds to NCFTA to target Donovan/Royaldutchshellplc?
What did Shell want the NCFTA to do to Donovan?

Separately, Donovan says another email released by Shell has a Shell employee telling Fox News in March 2007 that “royaldutchshell plc.com is an excellent source of group news and comment and I recommend it above what our own group internal comms puts out”

Thank you

EXTRACTS END

Can you please let us have a date for the first email and any comment you wish to make on the emails relating to CAS/NCFTA?

Being the target of Shell’s “invisible” investigations, we would certainly like to know the answers to these questions.

Regards

John Donovan

REPLY FROM RICHARD WISEMAN

From: richard.wiseman@shell.com
Date: 11 March 2010 14:22:41 GMT
To: john@shellnews.net, Gavin.White@shell.com
Subject: RE: Shell internal docs/comms supplied 8 March 2010

Registered in England and Wales number 4366849
Registered Office:  Shell Centre, London, SE1
Headquarters: Carel van Bylandtlaan 30, 2596 HR
The Hague, The Netherlands

From: John Donovan <john@shellnews.net>
Date: 28 November 2009 10:16:41 GMT
To: gavin.white@shell.com
Subject: Re: Data Protection Act 1998 – SAR

Dear Mr White.

Thank you for your email dated 27 November.

I note that you ignored my question about what, in Shell’s view, constitutes a “reasonable interval” between SAR applications from the same applicant. A response on that matter will be made after I receive the delivery of the promised information on or before 1st December i.e. by next Wednesday.

I note that you have added another Shell lawyer – Maria Bowden – to the circulation list. Logic suggests she must have some relevant expertise, perhaps Shell buried secrets (nuclear or otherwise), defamation law, the Data Protection Act, or something connected with the company endorsed intimidatory conduct of Shell security guards at Shell Centre.

Best Regards

John Donovan

EMAIL FROM GAVIN WHITE TO JOHN DONOVAN

From: Gavin.White@shell.com
Date: 27 November 2009 10:41:27 GMT
To: john@shellnews.net
Cc: michiel.brandjes@SHELL.com, richard.wiseman@SHELL.com, Maria.Bowden@SHELL.com
Subject: RE: Data Protection Act 1998 – SAR

Dear Mr Donovan,

We have received your email dated 19 November, which makes reference to your previous request dated 10 November.

Although we appreciate your flexibility with regard to the period within which Shell has to comply with your subject access request (SAR) submitted on 4 September 2009, we believe it is not in either party’s ability to extend the prescribed period for responding to a SAR, nor to alter the statutory rules governing its submission and the subsequent response to it.

Accordingly, we confirm that as per our letter dated 16 November  we will respond to your SAR not later than 1 December 2009, in accordance with sections 7(8) and 7(10) of the Data Protection Act 1998 (Act). Our response will include the information constituting your personal data as held by Shell at the time when we received your SAR , pursuant to section 8(6) of the Act , but not any information produced or received by Shell after that time, such as the information requested in your email dated 10 November.

With regard to the documentation referred to in your email dated 15 November, to the extent that such documentation exists and constitutes personal data relating to you, then it will be disclosed to you as part of our response to your SAR dated 4 September 2009, in accordance with the Act and subject to any applicable statutory exemption.

Yours faithfully

Gavin White SI-LC-SFL
Company Secretarial Adviser
Corporate Secretariat, London
—————————————————————–
Phone: + 44 (0) 20 7934 3342
Fax: + 44 (0) 20 7934 5153
Email: gavin.white@shell.com
Postal address: 8th Floor, Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
Internet: http://www.shell.com

Shell International Limited is a company registered in England and
Wales. Its registered office address is Shell Centre, London, England,
SE1 7NA, United Kingdom. (Company number 3075807)

—–Original Message—–
From: John Donovan [mailto:john@shellnews.net]
Sent: 19 November 2009 21:16
To: White, Gavin SI-LC-SFL
Cc: Brandjes, Michiel CM RDS-LC; Wiseman, Richard RM SI-RDS-CCO
Subject: Data Protection Act 1998 – SAR

Dear Mr White

Thank you for your letter dated 16 November 2009.

My email dated 10 November requested any relevant documents/notes/ instructions relating to:

2. Shell statements about me issued recently to the Guardian newspaper  and the BBC.

You claim that seeking this information would involve significant disruption which could hamper efforts to meet the SAR deadline. This  conjures up an image of a team beavering away day and night gathering  the necessary information. I somehow doubt this is the case. Since  there has been no request for extra time to deal with what would amount to nothing more taxing than a few minutes work to avoid a  further SAR application, with all that apparently entails, it leaves a suspicion that Shell has something to hide and is trying to delay  disclosure. This impression is reinforced by the threat that you will  not respond to a further SAR application from me until an undefined “reasonable interval”. Is this months or years?

My email of 15 November relates solely to any relevant Shell correspondence concerning the supposedly decontaminated land at Earley  that Shell sold to a property developer for a housing estate. Any such correspondence took place before my SAR application. Consequently there is no possible excuse for it not being supplied. I know that it  exists.

You say that you won’t supply any addional documents and information produced after 22 October (whatever that means) but include with your letter two such items, thus acting in apparent breach of the rule you have just quoted.

I would like to make a constructive suggestion which would avoid the need for any further SAR application to Shell by me in the foreseeable future. The last gap was nearly three years and dependent on your response, I have no plans to shorten that interval. I am quite relaxed about waiting until say, 15 December for Shell to supply all of the requested information.

The ball is in your court.

Best Regards

John Donovan

Photo: John Donovan of Royal Dutch Shell Plc.com

Date: 15 November 2009
To: gavin.white@shell.com
Cc: michiel.brandjes@shell.com

cc. richard.wiseman@shell.com
Subject: Data Protection Act 1998 – Subject Access Request

Attention of Mr Gavin White, Company Secretarial Department, Shell International Limited

Dear Mr White

You are of course aware of our SAR Application lodged on 4 September 2009 via Mr Brandjes and my subsequent correspondence with you on the matter, most recently my email dated 10 November.

Since I have not yet received the information requested under the application, can I just remind you to include any relevant correspondence that Mr Wiseman had with any residents of homes built on or near the former Shell terminal at Earley near Reading in Berkshire.  As you may be aware, multiple attempts were made by  Shell to decontaminate the land prior to its sale to Persimmon Homes for the housing development.

Best Regards

John Donovan