More than £50,000 of taxpayer money has been spent on lawyers trying to prevent a review of protection orders being issued after a disabled man died in his own home.
The costs were part of a nearly £1m bid under the last government to prevent the release of various documents under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act.
This is included in the cost Home office Block a £30,000 demand from the Guardian for the total cost of publicly protecting the royal family.
The figures were revealed after requests were made public by Democracy for Sale, which sought details to try to prevent the release of information under the last government.
Some of the expenditure that has been uncovered is related to an attempt by a campaigner at the Child Poverty Action Group to get the charity to keep the results of a review by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) into its accounts.
The existence of recognition was revealed in the reports of his death Graham Errol, who was consumed by starvation in June 2018 after the DWP wrongly stopped his out-of-work disability benefits, leaving him without any benefits.
The information commissioner ordered the department to release the results of the review in 2022, which the DWP had tried to keep secret for two years.
Graham, 57, weighed just four-and-a-half stone when his body was found by bailiffs who were trying to evict him after eight months of benefits.
Despite spending £35,600 on solicitors and £15,400 on solicitors, the DWP appeal was dismissed and the information revealed to Owen Stevens, global credit adviser at the Child Poverty Action Group.
A DWP spokesperson said the department complies with the FoI regime, but added: “We exercise our right to challenge decisions from the Information Commissioner’s Office, which can incur legal costs.
“They are justified in protecting and processing information lawfully in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act.”
Ministerial departments in the last government spent £937,000 fighting transparency in 56 legal cases which were listed in 2023.
Many have failed in their attempts at secrecy, while ruling judges have served the state best by issuing patents.
Post Newsletter promotion
In other cases, efforts to increase transparency have been frustrated. The judges ruled on the freedom of information tribunal this year the cost of keeping members of the royal household could not be disclosed to the public.
Their decision, made after hearing detailed evidence behind closed doors and under a legal challenge from the Home Office, means the proposal to protect the royal family – thought to run for millions of years – will remain an official secret.
The DWP and the Ministry of Defense have meanwhile spent the highest six figures of taxpayers’ money to fight transparency, spending £120,000 and £105,000, respectively.
However, the real government spend is likely to be substantially higher than £937,000 because many departments refused to respond to the request or did not hold some of the information requested.
Information was obtained from 58 of 118 cases from the government’s case register for 2023.