Almost a year has passed since the Taoiseach conceded in the Dáil that charges imposed under the Freedom of Information Act deserved further scrutiny because of their negative impact on the public's access to information. As might be expected from a Government that engineered the emasculation of the original Act, however, nothing has happened. And a healthy requirement for transparency and accountability within the public administration has been subverted.
In her annual report on the operation of the Act, the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner, Emily O'Reilly, yesterday catalogued a 32 per cent decline in usage of the legislation between 2003 and 2004 and blamed the introduction of high charges. She observed that the recent Travers report on illegal nursing home charges highlighted the need for transparency and accountability within the public administration. In that regard, the Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service failed in its obligation to review the operation of new secrecy provisions under the Act.
The determination of the Government to roll back those aspects of the legislation that facilitated an examination of ministerial decision-making may have encouraged some public bodies to resist investigation. For, while the majority cooperated fully with the Information Commissioner in reviewing reasons for withholding information, a handful were positively obstructive. In matters like this, where light is being shone into murky corners, it is vitally important that the Government leads by example. And the Information Commissioner has suggested that charges for certain types of request from Oireachtas members and the media should be waived.
Eastern European countries regard freedom of information as a cornerstone of their new democracies. Unfortunately, the importance of access to public records has been downgraded here. The greatest number of requests was received by the Department of Education in 2004, followed by the Departments of Social and Family Affairs, of Health and Justice. Six of the top 10 agencies from which citizens sought information were health boards.
Taking a benign view, the Information Commissioner believed the Government had not anticipated so great a decline in the usage of the Act when it approved the new scale of fees. She suggested it should revisit the issue because, out of eight comparable countries, Ireland is the only one with charges for an internal review. And appeal charges were 10 times higher than elsewhere.
The Act was changed because of frustration and embarrassment within the Government when details of poor decision-making were revealed in relation to the "Bertie Bowl" and other projects. Restrictions were placed on the kind of files that would be made available and charges were introduced. The action was hasty and ill-judged. Access to public records is an invaluable liberty. The Government should take steps to correct the damage it did to the Freedom of Information Act in 2003.