The free flow of information is the lifeblood of a healthy democracy. Citizens should be entitled to access official records in order to vindicate their rights and hold bureaucracy to account.
In the same way, the activities of State bodies and departments, along with decisions by ministers, should be made more transparent in order to improve the quality of public services. Unfortunately, this Government has opted for restrictions and secrecy.
Ombudsman Emily O'Reilly has complained, yet again, of the exclusion of important areas involving the Garda, refugees, the legal profession, finance and education under the Freedom of Information Act. For the third year, she has asked that charges be reduced. She protested also about a "political imperative that overrode everything else" when a Dáil committee bowed to Government pressure and rejected her request to remove 36 ministerial secrecy clauses.
This Government turned the clock back on a promising culture of openness and transparency. Charges it introduced under the Freedom of Information Act have cut the number of applications by almost 70 per cent since 2003. Areas of ministerial decision-making have been closed to public scrutiny and inadequate inspection services have been protected. This trend towards greater official secrecy has not been confined to the activities of the Office of the Information Commissioner. A request by the Standards in Public Office Commission for power to inquire into matters of significant public interest, in the absence of a formal complaint, was rejected.
In spite of such political obstruction, Ms O'Reilly observed that the Freedom of Information Act was still working, but not as well as it could. She identified key areas of administration which required greater scrutiny. She called for better record-management by official bodies. In addition, she noted that, unlike the other 26 EU countries, Ireland excluded Garda activities from scrutiny under the Act. Given the Government's attitude, it comes as no surprise to learn that civil servants have followed its lead and are now more restrictive in providing information than are other sectors.
These are important and worrying developments. At a time of increasing wealth and rapid economic development it is vital that public administration is seen to be fair and accountable and that government decisions are transparent. Anything less will encourage cynicism and could facilitate corruption. In the past, ministers displayed wilful arrogance by rejecting such necessary disciplines in their determination not to be held to account.
The process of forming a government is currently under way. An opportunity exists for the parties involved to make a new start; to encourage administrators to behave ethically and responsibly and to empower concerned citizens. The changes required would cost little, but their impact would be great. The importance of accountability within the public service and for those in positions of authority and trust cannot be exaggerated.