104 annual report 2012 The Ombudsman did not have sufficient grounds for rejecting the assessment by the Ministry of Justice that the Member of Parliament could not be given access to the document (in the form of a copy), but it was the Ombudsman’s opinion that the decision to refuse access was worded in an unfortunate and unclear manner. In addition, the Ministry of Justice should have considered whether the Member of Parliament could have been given the opportunity to read through the memorandum again. After receiving the Ombudsman’s statement, the Ministry of Justice made the contents of the memorandum public with the exception of a few details. F. MINISTRY OF CLIMATE, ENERGY AND BUILDING No cases concluded in 2012 were selected for publication in the Annual Report. G. MINISTRY OF CULTURE The following cases concluded in 2012 were selected for publication in the Annual Report: 2012-18. No grounds given for refusal of work grant The Literature Committee of the Danish Agency for Culture refused a work grant application from a writer of children’s books. It its letter of refusal, the Literature Committee stated that it had assessed the application on the basis of the scheme’s support criteria and had prioritised within the means available to the Committee. The writer did not find that an adequate reason had been given for the refusal and complained to the Ombudsman. During the Ombudsman’s processing of the case, the Literature Committee explained in more detail the criteria used in its assessment of applications. The Committee stated that it made its decision on the basis of the literary quality of a submitted text sample, and it elaborated on the elements which decided whether or not a text was considered to have the required literary quality.