Late changes to the Freedom of Information Bill 2013 – a cynical move

delayA recent post on The Story blog (see here) reveals the government’s cynical move to introduce last minute changes to the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill 2013 that will make FOI prohibitively expensive and therefore, in large part, unworkable. This (1) is contrary to what was promised and will put Ireland even more out of step with virtually all other countries, and (2) yet again demonstrates the need for real Dáil reform.

1. Not what was promised
Reinstatement of a more workable Freedom of Information law was one of the central planks of the government’s political reform proposals (set out in its Programme for Government):

“We will legislate to restore the Freedom of Information Act to what it was before it was undermined by the outgoing Government, and we will extend its remit to other public bodies including the administrative side of the Garda Síochána, subject to security exceptions. We will extend Freedom of Information, and the Ombudsman Act, to ensure that all statutory bodies, and all bodies significantly funded from the public purse, are covered.”

The Minister in charge, Brendan Howlin has been praising the efforts of his civil servants to produce robust new legislation fit for the Twenty-First Century. While many worried about the interminable delay in producing the legislation, there was reason to hope at least that Ireland would be (really) joining the large and fast growing pool of countries that operate FOI legislation. Currently 93 countries around the world have active FOI legislation, including most member states of the EU.

When the FOI Bill was first published, it was good to see the proposal as promised to extend its remit to cover additional bodies such as the Gardaí; however, the continuing fixation on charging fees for FOI requests remained a concern. Minister Howlin’s response, when asked, was that the fee was necessary to reduce the abuse of FOI by journalists and civil society groups. This is despite the fact that in the bulk of the other countries operating FOI legislation (90 out of 93) only Ireland, Israel and Canada apply a fee (see here and here).

The government seems unable to explain what makes us so different that requires a fee to be applied for each and every FOI request. This goes against the spirit of applying an effective FOI regime and it runs against the recommendations set out in the recent report of the Open Government Partnership that this government recently signed up to (see section 4.06). It is also contrary to one of the core principles of the influential Article 19 Global Campaign for Free Expression (see here).

Suddenly matters have become a lot worse. We now learn from The Story blog that Minister Howlin’s Department has decided to make things even more restrictive by introducing late amendments to the FOI Bill that propose applying separate fees for every FOI request that affect more than one division within an organization – in effect multiplying the size of the fee by the number of parts to an FOI request.

The Story has form in this area. The conveners of that Blog have blazed a vitally important trail in stretching the boundaries of what’s possible in opening up Irish government even despite the current limitations of the current legislation. They know what they’re talking about, so their warning that these late changes will ‘kill off’ FOI in Ireland should cause us all to sit up, pay attention and fight to prevent them. Minister Howlin needs to be challenged on this.

2. Dáil reform measures to date are a mere fig leaf
We need to know why Minister Howlin’s civil servants decided at this late stage to bring forward such dramatic and far-reaching amendments. Why was this not set out in the draft legislation and signaled at Heads of Bill stage to allow proper Dáil (and wider civil society) scrutiny at the outset? Introducing these changes just before Committee stage makes it all but impossible to roll them back, and any attempt to block it in the Dáil can be easily dealt with by this government’s beloved Guillotine.

Making public the government’s legislative intentions at Heads of Bill stage has been lauded by this government as one of its important Dáil reform measures. We’re told that this ensures proper parliamentary and public scrutiny of legislation at a sufficiently early stage. We’re told that this gives the Dáil a real say in influencing legislation.

All fine and dandy – until a government department decides to sneak in significant amendments later in the process as had happened here.

Dáil reform my a**e!

4 thoughts on “Late changes to the Freedom of Information Bill 2013 – a cynical move

  1. Bravo! There is nothing more effective than the articulate, but forceful, expression of fully justified anger and disgust at the self-serving antics of this government. We need much more of it. This faux ‘poilteness’ with which most official and academic discourse is conducted is a tool used by those exercising power and influence to suppress debate and dissent. It can and must be cast aside without descending in to incivility and rancour.

  2. Shame to see these late changes despite Ireland’s committment to the OGP and the calls for FOI legislation in Ireland to be in line with other European countries where no fees are charged! Being able to sneek in changes this way basically awards a free pass. I am not sure what a suitable way would be to influence these changes at this stage? Anyone else? We are taking this up as part of the proposals for the OGP action plan but it may be subject to similar ignorance and lack of accountability, and not sure they will make changes to it, yet again. Minister Howlin mentioned ‘abuse of’ FOI requests. My question would be for statistical evidence and why we do not look to other countries and learn from them how to deal with FOI requests if it is really a problem. Why do we do not take on board OGP recommendations and following other countries who allow their citizens to access information for free? We should not be putting a financial threshold on FOI requests. The information should be free for anybody. It is collected on behalf of the people and should should be accessible by the people, by anybody.

  3. “Jam yesterday, jam tomorrow, but never jam today” is this Government’s response to the introduction of checks and balances to limit the scope for excess by the powerful.

    This latest example shows just how much the governing elite (elected politicians, appointed official et al.) double-think….

    As part of the EU Presidency, they congratulated themselves on getting a new measure of Transparency into an accountancy directive – with the specific aim of revealing “unusual” payments by private companies in the developing world.

    U2’s Bono hailed this by saying “Transparency is the best antidote to corruption”.

    This is just another broken promise from a government that does not know how to rebuild trust in us voters, international institutions and markets. They play with words – thinking that people do not notice.

    For those who may claim that this is a once-off, I refer you to the reversal of the Government policy regarding the allocation of the local property tax, announced by Minister Phil Hogan on 12th March last.

  4. The most effective way to combat these changes would be to get some statistical evidence on the volume of requests from countries which do not have FoI charges.
    Can any of our political scientists step up to the plate on this one ??.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s