Enda Kenny
Ceist:7 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during April 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13337/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraWednesday, 26 May 2004
Ceisteanna (7)
Freagraí ó Béal (29 píosaí cainte)
Four freedom of information requests were received in my Department during April. All requests have been acceded to and are processed in accordance with both the 1997 Act and the 2003 Act and their implementation is kept under constant review.
I do not want to raise the usual questions that arise on a regular basis. During the first quarter of this year, 11 requests for information were made under the Freedom of Information Act, which compared with 80 received in the same period in 2003. That is a reduction of 85%. From that perspective it would appear that the Freedom of Information Act has effectively been neutered by the changes and charges brought in by the Government.
When the amending legislation was brought through the House, the Taoiseach said it would be closely monitored. What monitoring has taken place in light of the fall-off in applications? Does the Taoiseach accept that it is time for a fundamental review of the situation? Would he consider putting in place an independent review team that would include experts like the Ombudsman, who is also the Information Commissioner, to review the amended Freedom of Information Act and report back to the Oireachtas in due course, so that we could at least have an independent assessment as opposed to a political reaction on whether the Act has effectively been strangled and neutered?
The question is more appropriate to the Minister for Finance.
Is it?
In so far as it refers to the Taoiseach's Department——
He is the boss.
——the question refers specifically to freedom of information requests in his Department.
The Minister for Finance will take advice from the Taoiseach.
The Deputy's question also refers only to the month of April. It does not even refer to the first quarter of the year.
The Taoiseach wants to answer.
If I can give a brief reply in terms of my Department, that will answer the question anyway. When the Freedom of Information Act was introduced, it was stated there would be a significant level of use of historical and other data early on and that it would taper off after that anyway. Before any amendment to the Act, the figure for requests had halved. It went from 279 requests in my Department down to 146. None of the changes affected personal cases for which there is no charge. In the case of requests from journalists and others, there has been a reduction. I do not think the €15 fee can be cited as a major impediment. As far as a review is concerned, as I understand it, the Information Commissioner stated she would review this anyway. That report will address the issues raised by the Deputy.
Does the Government have any immediate intention of extending the terms of the Act to the Garda Síochána?
That question is more appropriate to the Minister for Finance. We are dealing with questions specifically to the Taoiseach's Department.
The Taoiseach is the Head of Government.
Yes, but there is——
All that is required is "yes" or "no". He would have it answered by now.
There are procedures and Standing Orders in place and the Chair has no choice but to observe them like everybody else.
It is a terrible job that the Ceann Comhairle has to do, but somebody has to do it. It is the relish with which he does it that upsets me.
While the 46% reduction in freedom of information requests is a fact of life, as the Taoiseach said, does he welcome it nonetheless and the fact that the culture and veil of secrecy that existed is being re-established as the norm? Is he is concerned that people are being dissuaded from seeking information because of the cost?
There is no cost to the public for freedom of information requests relating to personal records.
There is more to life than personal details.
There is no cost, but if the request relates to some other policy area, I do not think €15 will deter somebody trying to get information.
A great deal of information regarding reports and so on is already available. There are numerous hits on the EU information website. It is a quicker way of obtaining information and people can access reports and data. All this information is available to them. Documents and back-up documents are freely available nowadays. I do not think there any secrets regarding this information.
The Taoiseach referred to the fee as if it were derisory, yet at the same time we laud whisteblowers, watchdogs and what have you. What about those to whom freedom of information offered an opportunity to ensure disclosure and that details were brought to public attention? The reality is that the accruing of €15 per freedom of information request might be a real deterrent.
The Deputy's question might be more appropriate to the Minister for Finance.
Some people put in quite an amount of effort and endeavour——
I suggest the Deputy submits a question to the Minister for Finance.
——to draw out important information. People who could well perform a useful public service as sniffer dogs, so to speak, would be put off because the cost accruing would be prohibitive.
A small group of people were submitting hundreds of questions. They are now out of the equation, but that was never the intention of the Act. It exists to provide information for people. I do not believe journalists doing research would be put off by €15. It is just someone using the system as a bit of a joke.
Some of them are good sniffer dogs.