Government urged to make FoI law more transparent

The National Newspapers of Ireland yesterday urged the Government to scrap the €15 fee payable for freedom of information requests and called for proposed changes to FoI law to be expanded to allow for more openness and transparency.

The NNI told the joint committee on finance, public expenditure, and reform that in some cases, journalist requests for information were being met with a “take it or leave it, appeal it if you want, attitude” from information officers in public bodies.

Frank Cullen, NNI co-ordinating director, told the committee that bodies such as Nama and the NTMA — which are outside the scope of the act and which will remain so under the draft heads of the General Scheme of the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2012 — should be included.

Journalists Carl O’Brien, Dearbhail McDonald, and Mark Tighe gave their views to the committee on shortcomings in FoI law, with Ms McDonald saying the issues could be circumvented with “a proactive approach to open government”, including e-government.

Mr O’Brien said there were cases where some applications took more than three years to be returned, by which time laws had changed in the area under investigation. In another case he said he had been provided with a seven-page document where almost every line was redacted.

Mr Cullen said the NNI welcomed the bill but he urged expansion of various elements, claiming it would be more cost-effective for both those submitting applications and for the bodies asked for information.

Mr Cullen said commercial semi-state bodies and “quasi-judicial bodies” such as the personal Injuries Assessment Board should also be included within the scope of FoI.

He said training and retraining within bodies covered by FoI would help with proactive dissemination of information and better maintenance of records.

He said Ireland had led the way in terms of FoI and access to information but the 2003 amendment and the introduction of the €15 fee had been “retrograde”. He said the “onerous” fee structure — including search and retrieval costs — was being used as a deterrent by some bodies.

“One of the biggest problems with fees is the inconsistency,” he said, quoting journalists who had said one department would facilitate a request for free while another would attempt to charge hundreds of euro.

He said while some would argue that €15 was not “overly burdensome”, it had acted as a barrier to requests. Search and retrieval fees can reach thousands of euro and he said there should be incentives for bodies to comply with existing four-week time limits for furnishing information — instead of the “many delays” that regularly occur.