Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 3 February 2010
92 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Finance if he will comment on the refusal of the Information Commissioner to allow a freedom of information request to release documents related to two meetings on the night of 29 and 30 September 2008, one involving senior Ministers and officials and another involving senior banking executives. [5100/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraUnder the Freedom of Information Acts, the Information Commissioner is completely independent of the Government in the performance of her functions. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on her legally binding decision in this or any other case.
The Minister has given a very brief reply. Surely he accepts that he is the custodian of this information. Now that the public is pouring money into the banks to save them, does the Minister appreciate that people are entitled to information on the meetings between Ministers, as representatives of the people, and bankers? This House was misled in September 2008 in respect of a number of issues, not least the scale of the difficulty in the banking sector. In that context, I am sure the Minister will agree that it is imperative for us to get this information. Perhaps he will elaborate on these matters.
The Information Commissioner is not accountable to me in any sense. She makes her own decisions in this regard. She has decided that the materials in question are not required to be disclosed under the freedom of information legislation.
Will the Minister disclose the information?
It is not customary for such information to be disclosed. It is not covered in the freedom of information legislation for a good reason. That is the position. There is nothing unusual in any of this. The position I have set out in respect of these records applies to all Government records. As I understand it, that position is in accordance with the view of the Information Commissioner, having examined the records in question.
I would like to ask the Minister about his Department's handling of a number of freedom of information requests made by me, which have been ongoing since last July or earlier. The requests relate to the handling of the events referred to in Question No. 92. The Department has informed me that of the 90 documents pertaining to my request, it has decided to refuse to release 64 of them, to release ten of them in part and to release just 13 of them in their entirety. It is incredible, given that the actions of the banks have cost this country so much money, that the Department is taking this approach. It has nothing to do with the Information Commissioner, as the Minister is the primary decision-maker in terms of departmental policy. The Information Commissioner gets involved at a much later phase of the process. In my case, the only remaining phase probably involves having recourse to the courts.
I have no——
As my party's finance spokesperson, I am already spending hundreds of euro on trying to get information from the Department of Finance. As a Member of this House, I should be entitled to receive that information. The policy being operated by the Department essentially involves a complete clampdown on the vast bulk of my serious and reasonable freedom of information requests.
The Deputy will appreciate that I do not decide on requests for information.
The Minister does.
No, I do not decide on requests for information.
The Minister sets the policy of the Department. He can decide to release this information.
I do not decide on information requests at the Department. An official in the Department is designated to do that. That person's decision can be appealed to the Information Commissioner. That system applies to information concerning my Department.
The Minister sets the policy.
I have not changed or varied the policy that was pursued by my predecessor. As I understand it, the protection of Cabinet records is fundamental to the operation of the legislation.
The Government has disemboweled the freedom of information legislation.
I have not sought to change the policy. As the Deputy is aware, the Department decides separately from me on each freedom of information request. I have not engaged in any of Deputy Burton's verbal histrionics. I have not disemboweled or filleted the freedom of information legislation.
That is exactly what the Minister and his party have done.
I do not have a precise statutory function in relation to any of the matters that have been raised so far this afternoon.
It would be highly appropriate for this information to be brought into the public domain. Will the statutory inquiry into the banking system and the subsequent Oireachtas inquiry be able to obtain all the information on the meetings of 29 and 30 September 2008? Will public servants be allowed to issue expressions of opinion during the public inquiry into what happened on the nights in question?
Will the Minister give us details of the nature of the meetings that took place on the two evenings in question? Were they arranged for lobbying purposes? Was the Minister threatened or intimidated by the bankers? Did they attempt to threaten or bully the Minister on these matters?
This was all discussed in the House at the time.
The Minister is the custodian of this information. Others may make freedom of information decisions, but the Minister is before the House this afternoon to answer questions on these matters. In light of the import of the crisis that was brought upon us by these bankers, aided by Government policies, surely the Minister feels obliged to answer such questions.
A great deal of information can be gleaned from the parliamentary debate on the legislation that was produced following these meetings, during which I was questioned extensively about what exactly was said on the night in question. The question before us this afternoon has nothing to do with that issue. As Deputy O'Donnell is well aware, the terms of reference for the scoping inquiry do not include the Government decisions that were necessitated by the banking crisis. The inquiry is an examination of the banking crisis.
What about the statutory inquiry?
If the Deputy has studied the crisis to any extent, he will be aware that by September 2008, Government action on the matter was unavoidable.
The Minister did not answer my question on public servants.
Public servants will co-operate with any inquiries that are established.
The Minister will set the terms of reference, or gagging orders, for the inquiries.
