Britain may now have freedom of information, but the Evening Press reveals today how two different organisations - asked for information about York's controversial fireworks display - took very different views on what should be revealed.

York's Guy Fawkes fireworks fiasco generated one of the Evening Press's biggest ever postbags. Readers complained they had missed the display, but also raised serious concerns about health and safety issues.

Wanting to know the background to the City of York Council event - in particular whether police had raised safety concerns in the run-up to November 5 - the paper lodged requests under the Freedom of Information Act for correspondence between the council and North Yorkshire Police. The requests went to the local authority and subsequently to the police.

Copies of numerous emails between police and council officers were supplied earlier this month by the council, without any apparent editing. They resulted in the Evening Press revealing how police repeatedly warned the council of their safety worries before the event, and how people could not lawfully be prevented from using a public footpath across the firing zone at St Peter's School playing fields during the display.

But now the same documents have been supplied by North Yorkshire Police - but with some emails obscured by thick black lines.

The blackout removes the names of email senders and recipients, but also various comments from police and council officers.

For example, all but one paragraph of an eight paragraph email, sent to council officers on October 17 by the police's central area events officer, Paul Maloney, is obliterated.

The copy sent by the council shows that comments blacked out included:

"No mention has been made of the risk of conflict between the public watching events in the city centre and road traffic"

"With less than three weeks to run to November 5, we still do not have any plan of the event with an event manual showing how it will be managed"

"It is therefore crucial that event organisers and contractors are clear as to the legal responsibility that each may have."

However, North Yorkshire Police today defended its response to the request, saying it gave all the information it was asked to supply.

The head of complaints and professional standards, Superintendent Andy Bell, said that in accordance with the relevant legislation, the force released information as requested unless there was a specific reason to prohibit this.

"Such reasons generally refer to information relating to individuals, or information which could cause harm to individuals or the public," he said.

"On this occasion, the request referred specifically to the staging of the public fireworks display. This information was supplied. Other information which did not specifically refer to the original request was deleted."

He added that the claiming of exemptions under the Act was not taken lightly.

"The force follows established national practice carrying out harm and public interest tests as appropriate."

City of York Council declined to comment.

:: Playing fields site was 'unacceptable'

A POLICE memo claimed that St Peter's School playing fields were considered "unacceptable" for use as the fireworks firing zone - just five days before Guy Fawkes Night.

The memo, supplied by North Yorkshire Police under the Freedom of Information request, but not by the council, concerned a meeting held at the council's offices on November 1.

It revealed that Monks Cross might provide a viable alternative site to St Peter's, and that Chief Superintendent Tim Madgwick had expressed concerns over people's safety on footpaths in the area.

"This concern also highlighted the problems with the river crossings in the city, and the conflict caused by members of the public trying to gain a vantage point for seeing the fireworks, traffic that will stop on the roads indiscriminately and the inability to maintain a free flow of the roads for emergency service vehicles," it said. "St Peter's School site was considered to be unacceptable for the launch site."

But the council today disputed the accuracy of this claim, saying: "It was not said at any point during the meeting by anyone present that the St Peter's site was 'unacceptable for the launch site'."

A spokeswoman said there had been discussion about the appropriate level of stewarding and this had been increased as a result, and there had been agreement that a contingency site should be identified in case the site needed to be switched. "The council subsequently decided that this should be Knavesmire."

A North Yorkshire Police spokesman said the force stood by the memo.

Updated: 10:23 Friday, January 20, 2006