Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the witnesses for attending this morning's meeting. I also thank them for the remarks made earlier about the former Minister, Eithne Fitzgerald, in the context of the introduction of ground-breaking freedom of information legislation. We often concentrate on the negativity of freedom of information requests, but this can lead to positive change in terms of record keeping and efficiencies in the public service to ensure not only that information is easily accessible when a freedom of information request is made but also that it is easily accessible for the body politic when it needs to review the record. It is hoped that the spirit of the Act will be upheld. I hope also that it will impact in the area of responses to parliamentary questions. Members are also often frustrated by the "only answer exactly what one is asked" type attitude. For this reason many Deputies, including myself, often table a number of parliamentary questions around the same issue.

I have a couple of questions for the witnesses. What is their vision in terms of incentivisation to meet deadlines in relation to freedom of information requests? I would welcome if they could put some meat on that vision. A user group system was previously operated in respect of freedom of information requests. Have the witnesses participated in it or would they consider it a positive move to put a structure around the user group through which a real method of engagement would be available?

We heard submissions yesterday on the format and PDFs, which ensures easy access to information. I acknowledge the point that the exemptions must be clarified. I welcome that the NTMA and NAMA are to come within the scope of this legislation. We will need to wait and see how this goes and to expand on it later, if necessary. The issue of appeal fees is causing huge frustration. There is a need to reduce appeal fees and not only in respect of freedom of information requests. For example, members of the public are often frustrated when they take up a matter with An Bord Pleanála, carry the fees, win the appeal and yet are at a loss financially. I believe that all non-commercial semi-State companies should be included, including Irish Water, EirGrid and other companies which have a monopoly. All State companies with a monopoly should come within the scope of the freedom of information legislation.

As for commercial semi-States, I agree with the witnesses to a point but not to the extent that it would disadvantage them when operating in a commercial market. One must be very careful in this regard. While it should be so in spirit, it should not be to such an extent that one would give their competitors a competitive advantage. Perhaps it could be designed in such a way that everyone in the market would have the same level of openness to freedom of information requests as the semi-State commercial entity. However, one must be very careful to not disadvantage such entities, because they are of significant importance to the State. I will leave it at that and might come back after the witnesses have dealt with these points.