Freedom of Information Act - 2013 changes

Manach

There is a well regarded web site that deals with Freedom of Information Act (FOI) matters, thestory.ie. Over the past week the author has raised the issues over the new version of the act. In essence, the price to do multiple FOI requests will increase per item rather than be one fixed price – ie instead of one 15e charge, it will be 15e per item. The upshot of this according to the author is it will severely limit the act's effectiveness. This news article IT also mentions it: "Brendan Howlin to introduce additional fees for applications with multiple requests"
In parallel to this, the number of ministerial certs issued to stop FOI requests under this government has also increased as per the Information Commissioner's 2012 report. So, would this be a legitimate way of cutting FOI costs or is it a means to reduce the public/journalist FOI queries?

Scofflaw

Manach wrote: »

There is a well regarded web site that deals with Freedom of Information Act (FOI) matters, thestory.ie. Over the past week the author has raised the issues over the new version of the act. In essence, the price to do multiple FOI requests will increase per item rather than be one fixed price – ie instead of one 15e charge, it will be 15e per item. The upshot of this according to the author is it will severely limit the act's effectiveness. This news article IT also mentions it: "Brendan Howlin to introduce additional fees for applications with multiple requests"
In parallel to this, the number of ministerial certs issued to stop FOI requests under this government has also increased as per the Information Commissioner's 2012 report. So, would this be a legitimate way of cutting FOI costs or is it a means to reduce the public/journalist FOI queries?

Or both/neither? After all, there is a cost in man-hours to produce items in answer to FOI requests, and that cost is per item requested, not per request. If you're going to charge for FOI requests, then a per-item charge is not intrinsically unreasonable.

Having said that, I'm opposed to FOI fees in the first place. We already pay, through taxation, for the information we are requesting through FOI, and that cost, from my perspective, should simply be part of civil service spending. With respect to figures for the costs of FOI, this report suggests an average cost in 2009 of €425 per request, and a total cost of €6.9m over 14,290 requests (although it should be said that the methodology behind this figure is of the back of envelope variety).

Obviously, the €15 charge per request doesn't begin to cover the costs there - it yields €214,350 - and upping that to €15 per item is hardly going to make a big difference either, which does suggest that the fee has nothing really to do with the real costs in any case.

If the purpose of the fee isn't to defray costs, as it clearly isn't, is it there to put people off making FOI requests? I wouldn't really think so - €15 wouldn't put me off if I wanted to know something, and would, to be honest, represent something quite similar to the costs of finding out information by non-FOI means (that is, phone calls and emails/letters). Journalistic requests are presumably a business expense even where not covered by an employer, and private individuals would presumably not often have the need for the high double figures that would make FOI requests a noticeable expense.

So I'm not sure that this is either a way of a reasonable way of defraying costs or of putting people off making FOI requests, except where the request is to some extent rather casual. It looks to me like a fee aimed at deterring such casual requests on the one hand, and deterring the obsessive on the other hand. I can see it impacting small budget 'citizen journalists' such as those from The Story, and I can sympathise with a preference for no fee increase there, but I doubt they're the target of this.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Manach

In binary maths, all options are valid - in probability maths some are more equal than others. Tony Blair said that the FOI act was his greatest mistake. Given all the stemmed from it, Moats for ducks etc, for the political class that might be an accurate summary - especially when the light of transparency is shown on the Government workings, such as the cost that is set for answering queries.
On costs, without FOI and the empowerment it grants citizens then issues like
> Tendering of vehicles for Army contracts
> EPA Investigatory records on environmental damage by companies
> Consultant settlements in the HSE
[source the Information Commissioner site]
Would not be found. Here the economic benefit is a system where what was once cloaked under secrecy laws are now available for discovery and this promotes better use of tax-money. Raising money for multiple requests to prevent vexatious requests is not a valid reason as the old act already gives the power to dismiss such requests. The core data of an issue is rarely available available as a nugget to be pluck from the state, instead it requires a multi-front mode of inquiry where the state can delay in internal review or redact aspects of the data. Hence these extra charges are a roll-back to an older, more hermanatic sealed government mode of operation.

Scofflaw

Actually, the new charging structure is apparently not based on the number of individual queries made as part of a request, but on the number of "internal units" that are involved in answering the queries:

A new provision, an amendment to Section 12, is now proposed. If this amendment goes through, a single FOI request will cost you multiples of the outrageous current €15 fee. How many multiples will depend on how many administrative units, in a Department or office, are required to take action to answer your question. For every internal unit bestirring itself, you have to pay another €15.

As you can’t know in advance how many units any question will require to act in order to be answered, you can only guess how much any FOI request will cost. We can’t know the definition of “unit”, referred to as “different functional areas” [of the FOI body] each body will adopt.

http://www.mcgarrsolicitors.ie/2013/11/10/freedom-information-fees-multiplied-new-amendment/

I should probably point out that the view of McGarr Solicitors is that the FOI restrictions have been specifically crafted to target Gavin Sheridan:

I also said that I thought the intent in this perverse legislative drafting was to deprive Gavin Sheridan of TheStory.ie of the ability to make data enquiries, of the sort that had uncovered, for instance, the expense claims of TDs, amongst many other issues. Now TheStory.ie has alerted readers to a new threat to openness and transparency in Ireland. A threat that, it says, may result in TheStory.ie site closing down.

Although that refers to an earlier incarnation of the FOI amendments.

If McGarr are correct about the form of the new fee structure, then that has a dampening effect beyond the idea of €15 per individual query, because, as they point out, you can't know in advance how many 'units' will be involved in answering your request. I would think, though, that the definitions aren't quite as open-ended as McGarr makes out, but will settle down over time.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Buddha Star

In relation to index of precedents. see below current legislation on current website in comparison with new legislation PDF.
Why is this crucial legal requirement which assists the ordinary citizens being removed?


Short guide to index of precedents from current website.

PART 3
Rights in relation to Records

Chapter1
General rights in relation to records and decisions

Precedents refer to reasoned decisions previously made by public bodies which are used as standard interpretation in determining similar cases. By their nature, while some precedents will have general application to subsequent decisions, many will deal with very specific points of interpretation which may arise infrequently and only in respect of particular groups or narrow interests. For practical reasons therefore, public bodies are required to publish an index of these precedents only, alerting the public to their existence. In accordance with section 16(6), copies of precedents shall be made available on request.

http://foi.gov.ie/chapter-2-publication-requirements/


NEW LEGISLATION removes the Index in it's current form which can stand up in court. which is important for the ordinary citizen and democracy.

PART 3
Rights in relation to Records
Chapter1
General rights in relation to records and decisions
Section 8 deals with the publication of information about FOI
bodies. This section replaces Sections 15 and 16 of the existing 1997
Act which require that a public body must maintain manuals
outlining its structures and functions, detailing the services it
provides, indicating the types of records which it holds, decisions
made, indexing precedents etc. Given developments since FOI was
first introduced, these manuals are no longer considered ‘‘fit for
purpose’’.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2013/8913/b8913d-memo.pdf

listermint

This whole charade is political protectionism.

No better person than Howlin to have dreamt it up and not better society than Ireland to let him get away with it.

Manach

Looks like Minister Howlin has backed down:
"
Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin has withdrawn plans to change amendment 33 in Ireland's Freedom of Information laws.
" - link RTE.