Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)

I welcome this Bill, introduced on behalf of Fianna Fáil. It is long overdue. The main problem with the legislation is that it does not go far enough. It is easy to pick the usual suspects and say that the NTMA and NAMA and others listed in the Bill should be subject to freedom of information legislation. I do not understand why other bodies in receipt of State subsidies or State monopolies are not subject to the Act as well. Why is it not possible to have freedom of information for Iarnród Éireann, the DAA and other State bodies which do not operate in a commercial environment as many of the others do? For such monopolies in which the State is the only shareholder, it is only right that they should be subject to the legislation as well. Commercial sensitivities may apply in all cases but exceptions can be made. Still, so many hidden, murky practices were going on within some semi-state organisations that I cannot understand why we do not add these bodies to this list as well.

As a journalist I have had experience of the operation of freedom of information legislation. One body from which it was virtually impossible to get information was Iarnród Éireann. The practices in Iarnród Éireann were utterly unacceptable and most secretive. It took the summoning of the directors and executives of the company before the Joint Committee on Transport to get any information and, even then, it was like pulling teeth. Moreover, it was impossible to get any of the non-executive directors of the semi-state companies before the Joint Committee on Transport or any other committee. As a result, information on many of these semi-state bodies in which there was, at least in one case, admitted corruption was almost impossible to ascertain. There is a real need for penetrative questioning and interrogation of the semi-state bodies as well as the State agencies. There is also a need for a change in the method by which the freedom of information system operates.

Deputy Fleming referred to the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner, Emily O'Reilly. She referred specifically in her annual report this year - she has done so previously as well - to various bodies which should be included under the legislation, including NAMA, the NTMA and others. The operation of the Act is clumsy and geared against the person asking the question, whether a journalist or an individual citizen. I worked as a business journalist with the Sunday Independent. Once, when I went looking for information on FÁS, the difficulty in getting that information, even though FÁS was subject to the Freedom of Information Act, was extraordinary. The obstructions put in the way were extraordinary and most difficult to counteract. My memory of this is clear. I received an anonymous tip-off of where to look and what to look for. I admit this shows a lack of journalistic skills on my part. I approached FÁS and asked for the information. The organisation put every possible obstacle in the way. I am open to correction but, from memory, initially the organisation said that for the particular questions asked - relating to details about what took place in Florida and the junkets being run for the benefit of staff and directors - the process would cost me €1,000 or something equivalent. Those responsible were somewhat surprised when I said that the cost was fine by me. I was not paying for it; the Sunday Independent was paying for it.

See this speech in context