JOINT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Wednesday, 7 Jun 2006

Review under Section 32(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 1997.

Chairman

Members will be aware that ministerial reports under section 32(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 1997 were submitted, as was the Information Commissioner's report. Where the commissioner's opinions are at variance with those of Ministers, the Ministers concerned were afforded an opportunity to respond. The secretariat to the committee has helpfully produced a document that sets out the information in the commissioner's report on a Department by Department basis and includes the responses received from Departments. I propose we examine these responses in light of this committee's obligation to report to the Dáil on the operation of section 32 of the Freedom of Information Act. If particular difficulties arise, we might postpone our deliberations but I would like to complete the majority of our work today.

We need to discuss only the areas of disagreement between the Information Commissioner and Departments. If both are agreed on inclusion or exclusion, we will accept their combined approach.

In respect of the Department of Agriculture and Food, there are five areas of agreement but a dispute has arisen with regard to the EC (Authorisation, Placing on the Market, Use and Control of Plant Protection Products) Regulations 2003. The Department recommends that the regulations be excluded from the Third Schedule but the Information Commissioner disagrees. We asked the Minister to respond in light of the commissioner's opinion and she again recommended their exclusion. This committee must form an opinion on whether the matter should be included in the Third Schedule.

From the Department's point of view, the regulations should apply to a restricted range of information supplied by companies seeking authorisation for the marketing and use of their plant protection products. Under the directive, member states are obliged to ensure that information supplied by applicants involving industrial and commercial secrets is treated as confidential if the applicant so requests. In other words, the Department believes the regulation should not be included in the Third Schedule because it concerns potentially commercially sensitive information. The Information Commissioner does not accept that argument.

Deputy Nolan

If information is commercially sensitive, the companies involved deserve protection.

Chairman

I hope I am not being unfair to either side in my interpretation of the matter. The Department claims that the best way to protect commercially sensitive information is by excluding it from the Third Schedule and it does not want the Information Commissioner to make an adjudication, even though she promises to be conscious of commercial sensitivity, in case the information is later released for other purposes. The Information Commissioner believes she should be able to adjudicate as to whether information is commercially sensitive. Similar disagreements arise with regard to the Patents Acts and the IDA.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

We should have faith in the judgment of the Information Commissioner in such matters. She has been appointed to carry out a particular function, part of which involves the making of adjudications. The Department takes too much of a protectionist and overly sanitised approach to the matter and should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. We should recommend adherence to the views expressed by the Information Commissioner.

Chairman

Have other members any comments to make on the issue? Departments are of the opinion that they can only guarantee the protection of commercially sensitive information by preventing an adjudication on the part of the Information Commissioner. For her part, the commissioner believes she is qualified to make the necessary decisions.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I concur with that.

Chairman

Do members wish to comment? There are well over 100 legislative issues to examine but there is agreement on the majority. Only 30 points of difference remain, across a number of Departments. This particular one is the only area of disagreement between the Minister for Agriculture and Food and the Information Commissioner. Do members have a view?

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I will make a concluding point because I have limited time, having to be present in the Chamber for Leaders' Questions at 3.45 p.m.

Deputy Burton

I also have to be present in the Dáil.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I recommend that we reflect confidence in the position of the Information Commissioner. It is not our responsibility to take the side of the Department.

Deputy Burton

I must leave for Leaders' Questions. I refer to an earlier issue, about which I had forgotten. When the banks come before the joint committee, would members agree to a discussion on the decision of the Bank of Ireland to abandon the defined benefit pension scheme for new employees? The banks are enjoying an extraordinarily profitable period and, if we are to have a general discussion with Mr. O'Regan and representatives of the Irish Bankers Federation, such an item might be included on the agenda.

Chairman

Pension contributions are an item on our work programme.

Deputy Burton

This is specific to the banks.

Chairman

It is specific to many businesses.

Deputy Burton

The Bank of Ireland announced it at the time they also announced extraordinary profits.

Chairman

Pensions are on our work programme. If members are rushing, I will make a suggestion and bring the meeting to a close. I suggest we progress the debate, because I suspect there might be different views among members, in an informal way, rather than in a sub-committee. There will be a maximum of three from the Government side and three from the Opposition. This debate could take place 30 different times in a full committee meeting, whereas one session involving five or six of us might lead to progress which we could report back to the committee.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

The Chairman does well to have five or six of us present at any time. It sounds like a full meeting to me.

Deputy Burton

How long does the Chairman expect the rest of this meeting to take?

Chairman

Is Deputy Ó Caoláin remaining?

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I am not able to. Leaders' Questions are being taken in the House.

Chairman

I will adjourn the meeting because I do not wish to proceed in the absence of Opposition members.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Maybe the Chairman can arrange another meeting because it is an important issue.

Chairman

Yes. I wish to conclude it before the summer. One or two hours might be sufficient.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Will it be an item on the agenda next week?

Chairman

The Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, will attend next week and the following Wednesday we will deal with decentralisation. It will be on the agenda of the meeting after that.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I wish to clarify a point relating to Tralee Beef and Lamb. Can the Chairman say whether that will be a substantive item on the agenda of the next meeting, or will it also be dealt with after the meetings of 14 June and 21 June?

Chairman

The schedules for the meetings of 14 June and 21 June are agreed and cannot be changed.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Is a meeting scheduled for 28 June?

Chairman

I do not think a meeting has been formally scheduled but I expect there to be one on that date.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Will the issue relating to Tralee Beef and Lamb be on the agenda?

Chairman

Yes, as will the discussion on freedom of information. I would like to conclude both in the immediate future.

We can proceed without members of the Opposition but it is not good practice. The meeting will adjourn until next week, when the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, will attend to discuss the National Development Plan 2007-2013.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until 12 p.m. on Wednesday, 14 June 2006.