Freedom of Information requests will cost €15

MDR

Taken from rte.ie .... needless to say I will be roaring abuse at my TD over this sh*te ! I am spiting fire ..... how dare they !

(09:16) The Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy, has announced that requests under the Freedom of Information Act will now incur a cost of €15.

Controversial changes made to the Freedom of Information Act earlier this year paved the way for the introduction of these charges.

From next Monday, anyone making a request for non-personal information will have to pay an up-front fee of €15.

But if members of the public are not happy with a Department's response, extra charges will apply.

An internal appeal to the Department in question will cost €75, while it will cost €150 to appeal a decision to the Information Commissioner.

The recently appointed Commissioner, former journalist Emily O'Reilly, told RTÉ News she was studying the Department of Finance document and would make a statement later today.

While Mr McCreevy said the changes will lead to a better appreciation of a service which has been estimated to cost hundreds of euro per request, the move has been strongly criticised by Fine Gael, the Greens and the Labour Party.

The Labour Party spokeswoman on Finance, Joan Burton, described the move as the most backward ever taken by the Government.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties and the National Union of Journalists said there was no justification for introducing the new charges.

NUJ Irish Secretary Seamus Dooley said the charges were 'an outrageous attempt to thwart citizens' access to public information'.

flav0rflav

relevance? To IOFFL. Maybe you meant to post in Privacy/Civil Liberties?

MDR

IOFFL would be a heavy user of the FOI ....

flav0rflav

And pizza.











sorry, just came to mind, i'll get back to work now.

Sleipnir

So if you ask a department for info under the Freedom Of Information Act, it'll cost you 15 euro.
If the department say "we can't find anything, we lost it"
it'll cost you more money to take issue with that!??
Talk about a cash cow.

Zombrex

Freedom of Information just got a lot less free


This is quite an important set back for government accountability. I think it would get a lot more views if this was moved to the Politics or Humanities boards.

gandalf

Well this is a disgrace!!!!

I work for a company that tenders for government business and we use FOI on a regular basis to monitor that we were actually providing a competitive quote and to make sure no dodgy dealings are going on (it takes alot of effort to produce a tender).

Between this and trying to curtail the tribunials I feel this Government actually do have a lot to hide and are trying to get back to the good old days of FF's heyday ie the 1970's.

What next premium rate numbers to ring the Civil Service, what a pack of cowboys !!!

Gandalf.

Rolo Tomasi

I feel ill, anyone see a general election around here any where.

No election for about three years, and you can be almost guaranteed that, the 18 months beforehand, will be used to butter up the electorate again with good announcements mixed with a liberal encashment of SSIA's.
Thats the way governments do it.

And unless something major goes wrong,the fickle electorate will vote for the good old reliables again.
Either that or the government changes and the new brush does lots of things we hate for a few years and then butters us up again- a merry go round really, but human nature.

I'd imagine too that, ordinary Joe's ie the bulk of the electorate won't care about an FOI charge, it's only those who use it to a great degree that will.
Hence, they are killing two birds with the one stone here, ie discouraging too many prying eyes ( which is an affront to democracy ) whilst raising a little revenue.
Newspaper pockets are too big to be affected by this , so it's unlikely to hide any major scandal.
But it will affect those with smaller pockets as in a company such as Gandalf mentions, the only upside, if you could call it that, is the tax relief on the new expense which is small enough.
mm

Sparks

While it's nice to see people taking note of when they are shafted, this was on the cards the moment that the FOI amendment act was proposed. So why the surprise now and why not the protest back then?

:rolleyes:

Paddy20

This is a blatant attack on the existing civil rights of Irish citizens and should be condemned as a serious step backwards in our Irish Free States progress to a true democracy.

Charlie, should imho resign, and Bertie & Co should have a rethink about this insult to the populace which they are supposed to serve.

Paddy20:mad:

Sparks

This is a blatant attack

No, this was a blatant attack. It happened when the FOI amendment act was passed. Which was some time ago.

Paddy20

Sparks,

I stand corrected. When was the FOI amendment act passed?.. please.

Thanks.

Paddy20

Sparks

April 11 this year.

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by gandalf
Well this is a disgrace!!!!

I work for a company that tenders for government business and we use FOI on a regular basis to monitor that we were actually providing a competitive quote and to make sure no dodgy dealings are going on (it takes alot of effort to produce a tender).

Gandalf.

FOI will remain free to private individuals so in that sense our civil liberties / rights are protected . . . I can see no reason why I as a taxpayer should be paying the expense of having civil servants running around preparing information just so that companies like the one you work for can maintain your competitive edge . . . if anything they should be charging more to businesses for this information so that they can offer a cheaper service to voluntary organisations.. .. .. .

gandalf

Well sorry hallelujajordan I disagree with you quite strongly on this.

FOI should be available freely to all.

If we (my company) are looking for Information that we had no input into then yes I agree we should have to pay for it but if we are trying to get information about a government tender that we spent time (and money in most cases) responding to then for the sake of accountability and fair play we should be allowed to get Information on it.

To be honest the various Government bodies should provide this information freely to participants in such competitions but this rarely happens.

Gandalf.

Sparks

FOI requests are not free to private individuals, they're free to requests regarding personal infomation.

Lord Nikon

So much for our FREE-dom. It's now gonna cost me 15euro. As if the government couldn't find anything else to put a levy on.

hallelujajordan

For cryin' out loud . . it's €15 per request . . . that would pay for about 10 minutes of a civil servants time . . . .. the alternative is that we pay this collectively in our taxes . . . .

I don't see why this is any different than having to pay X amount for a birth certificate . . .it's just a small administrative charge to offset the costs . . .

I'd rather see my tax bucks going towards healthcare / infrastructure than this !

Sparks

The point, hallelujajordan, is that you are allready paying for this through taxes - how else do you think they've been paying the civil servants to prepare the answers to FOI queries for the last few years?
This charge is not being brought in for financial reasons.
And even the new FOI commissionar has said publicly that they're a bad idea.

Originally posted by Sparks
The point, hallelujajordan, is that you are allready paying for this through taxes - how else do you think they've been paying the civil servants to prepare the answers to FOI queries for the last few years?
This charge is not being brought in for financial reasons.
And even the new FOI commissionar has said publicly that they're a bad idea.

Well it is an extra job for those civil servants, when they were doing other things prior to the FOI being enacted.
Personal taxes haven't risen in the meantime, but the take from them has fallen.
I mean, it's a charge, that they could have heaped onto something else instead, or worse continued to divert funds to the service at a time of falling exchequer returns by closing a few more hospital beds.
I see it then as an effeciency charge. It goes some way towards the cost of providing the information whilst discouraging abuse.
The charge in itself does not prevent newspaper snoops.

I don't know how many government contracts, Gandalfs company might tender for,for instance, but 30=€450 which, for peace of mind regarding, whether you were entitled to the contract or not isn't much, considering the value of the contract.
If it's a 100 or 300 contracts, I'd agree, it's costly.
mm

Sparks

Well it is an extra job for those civil servants, when they were doing other things prior to the FOI being enacted.

But the FOI act has been around for six years. Which means that the costs of it's implementation had reached as much of a steady-state as they were going to.

I mean, it's a charge, that they could have heaped onto something else instead, or worse continued to divert funds to the service at a time of falling exchequer returns by closing a few more hospital beds.

Hang on a moment. This isn't something that we're being given as a nicety - this is about our right to information about how our government is being run. We pay for that government allready - we shouldn't have to pay extra to know how it runs.

I see it then as an effeciency charge. It goes some way towards the cost of providing the information whilst discouraging abuse.

It also discriminates against use of the system on a financial manner - now if this was any other service, there would be bedlam about it. Like there is with the Health system for example.

I don't know how many government contracts, Gandalfs company might tender for,for instance, but 30=€450 which, for peace of mind regarding, whether you were entitled to the contract or not isn't much, considering the value of the contract.
If it's a 100 or 300 contracts, I'd agree, it's costly.

The point about the fees is not their level, it's their existance when you're already paying for the work through income tax anyway.

gandalf

Originally posted by Man
I don't know how many government contracts, Gandalfs company might tender for,for instance, but 30=€450 which, for peace of mind regarding, whether you were entitled to the contract or not isn't much, considering the value of the contract.
If it's a 100 or 300 contracts, I'd agree, it's costly.
mm

Man actually the amount of times we would have to appeal a decision is amazing. The last time I did the FOI offical of the Department involved actually admitted to me that the information we requested should have been published on the governments etender website without us having to request it and definately there were no grounds to withhold it. Remember a appealled request could cost up to €275, start multiplying that by a number and it mounts up.

Gandalf.

Originally posted by Sparks
But the FOI act has been around for six years. Which means that the costs of it's implementation had reached as much of a steady-state as they were going to.

It's a cost none the less, which was borne during the last six years of buoyant exchequer returns, that is no longer the case.
Your personal taxes haven't gone up in that period, unless you are earning more. So it was an extra service for the same contribution.

Hang on a moment. This isn't something that we're being given as a nicety - this is about our right to information about how our government is being run. We pay for that government allready - we shouldn't have to pay extra to know how it runs.

Well people do have to be paid for the work done, the money paid in wages won't come out of thin air, especially in current circumstances.

Originally posted by Gandalf:
the FOI offical of the Department involved actually admitted to me that the information we requested should have been published on the governments etender website without us having to request it and definately there were no grounds to withhold it. Remember a appealled request could cost up to €275, start multiplying that by a number and it mounts up.

I'd agree entirely there,the fact that you have to go through, this process for information on a tender that should be made available to you as standard and now , the extra expense of it is plainly ridiculous.
mm

Paddy20

Man,

Are you trying to defend the indefenceable?.. FREEdom of Information should mean just that i.e. FREE!.

Any charges are a blatant rip-off if not a criminal offence unless they change the name to The NOT FREE Information Act.;)

Paddy20.

Cork

Originally posted by Paddy20
Man,

Are you trying to defend the indefenceable?.. FREEdom of Information should mean just that i.e. FREE!.

Any charges are a blatant rip-off if not a criminal offence unless they change the name to The NOT FREE Information Act.;)
Paddy20.

Personal information will be free. I worked in the health service for a few months and the effort people made under the Freedom of Information act was considerable.

Yet why should we expect - non personal information should be free?

Who will pick up the tab?

The taxpayers of this country?

The present government has brought down taxes for those on average wages. Yet, If people want non personal information you should get it for free? Information that might cost much money do dig up should be given for free. Compliments of the Irish taxpayer.

If you want a newspaper - you pay for it.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
If you want a newspaper - you pay for it.

And if you want to see that your elected officials aren't abusing their positions, etc....you have to pay for it?

jc

Originally posted by Paddy20
Man,

Are you trying to defend the indefenceable?.. FREEdom of Information should mean just that i.e. FREE!.

Any charges are a blatant rip-off if not a criminal offence unless they change the name to The NOT FREE Information Act.;)

Paddy20.

Freedom and free are two different words;)
I never argued against the freedom of the information, I just explained the cost in getting it.
Afterall you are free to post on here, but it costs you money to do so.
mm

sceptre

Originally posted by Paddy20
Any charges are a blatant rip-off if not a criminal offence unless they change the name to The NOT FREE Information Act.;)

To bastardise Richard Stallman, "free as in 'available', not as in 'beer' "

I'm not the greatest fan of the new charges but there's a crucial difference there that you appear to be unaware of.

Sparks

Yet why should we expect - non personal information should be free?
Who will pick up the tab?
The taxpayers of this country?

The taxpayers of this country pay for the creation of the documents in the first place. Now, if the working documents used by the government were maintained on an open access basis, we wouldn't need to take up civil servant's time in gaining read-only access to them - but they're not. So we do need to take up some of their time in order to collate the information we seek.

The crucial point however, is that that service is not an extra service - it is part of their fundamental duties, or at least should be - which is the principle that the 1997 FOI act codified. Charging us extra for what should be a fundamental civic service is not only highly cynical, it's discriminatory and devious.

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks

The crucial point however, is that that service is not an extra service - it is part of their fundamental duties, or at least should be - which is the principle that the 1997 FOI act codified. Charging us extra for what should be a fundamental civic service is not only highly cynical, it's discriminatory and devious.

It may not be an additional service but they are associated costs.

These costs are far from free & have to be bourne by the taxpayer.

Charging will only ensure that Freedom Of Information is not duly abused.