Dáil debates

Friday, 6 July 2012

Freedom of Information (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2012: Second Stage

 

11:00 am

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)

A number of requests that were made are evident in the Bill, as are changes to the way the system works. Deputy Ross and Deputy McDonald were right to refer to the costs. The number of freedom of information requests dropped significantly because of the costs. However, there should be a barrier for nuisance requests. It should not be too easy. The same applies to the planning process. There should be transparency but there should also be a balance to counteract the serial objectors, including An Taisce and other bodies which object to make themselves feel good, look good or sound good. I have no wish for confusion in this area. I agree that many of the provisions of the Bill are needed, but even more are required. Some of the sacred cows should be dealt with as well. I am disappointed the justice system is not included. Not including it gives it a licence to do whatever it wants.

There were revelations recently in my constituency about the storage of e-voting machines. It is the job of but one person and there was no advertising or tendering. The machines ended up in the person's husband's shed, at a huge cost. There should be openness, transparency, decorum and a sense of normality.

I could not agree more with the point on FÁS. It used to be called Fianna Fáil's answer to slavery and then became a friends' association for foreign travel for those at the top, not those at the coalface. The amount of blackguarding that took place was unbelievable. The freedom of information system has not worked in that regard.

All Departments, by their nature, have reinforcements or lieutenants - pardon the metaphor - at the door to ensure only certain people get past, but information should be transparent and available. It should be available at a reasonable cost, but not free because this would be a legislative nuisance also. I am glad the Government has allowed Second Stage of the Bill to proceed today and is not opposing it for the sake of doing so, as it has done with many other Bills.

Deputy Ross referred to the decision by the electorate last year not to give powers of investigation to an Oireachtas super-committee. None the less, the Oireachtas has a very valuable role to play. Somebody has to hold people to account. Consider the case of NAMA. When it was established, I described it as a wild animal in the woods and said no one knew where it would end up. However, I did not believe so many fat bullocks would come out of it during its period of operation; nor did I believe there would be so many untouchable sacred cows or that developers who contributed to wrecking the economy would be paid by the agency. It is outrageous. I was not at yesterday's committee meeting referred to by Deputy Fleming but I do not believe the relevant parties will be too willing to provide answers. As an outsider looking at the general operation and what is done, I believe it will take some freedom of information requests to address the matter. Someone mentioned pulling teeth but it is like mining for gold in the desert because one will not get the information.

NAMA is a relatively new organisation. I voted in favour of it but am disappointed it did not have some reins or winkers such that we could restrain the wild beast and not add insult to injury, especially in view of the personal insolvency legislation introduced yesterday. It is on a different scale altogether but the town and village are the same. Developers are being protected and rewarded for creating a mess.

The firms of accountants working for NAMA contributed greatly to the mess also. People, especially homeowners and ordinary debtors, are bewildered by the existence of one law for the rich and another for the poor. This Bill is certainly an effort to further the freedom of information provisions but we need to be realistic about our expectations and examine fully how the freedom of information system is working. We must ensure there are compliance officers in each Department and body covered and that it will be possible to determine whether bodies are compliant. If they are not, we should not give them a CE2 but a red card.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.