Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge that this is a huge and very welcome step forward but will make some observations in the spirit of improving the legislation further.

The table on page 29 of the report shows there is a severe step change in the fees that can be charged. The first five or six hours are free but if a requester's application takes seven hours to process, he or she is to be charged for all seven hours. It is peculiar that the table indicates a charge of zero for each of the first few hours but then there is a sudden leap to €146 at the point of the seventh hour. Perhaps the ministerial order could allow that the first five hours are free and the hourly charge begins at the sixth hour with a charge for one hour. It makes more sense than suddenly charging for all seven hours as the step change is strange otherwise.

Similarly, when the table goes from 35 to 40 hours, the €500 cap ceases. My reading of the proposed amendment says the first five or six hours are free but if an application takes seven hours to process the charge is for all seven hours and the first five hours are no longer free. If this could be changed, that would be great. There is a linear relationship between fees charged and time taken after this point until fees flat-line at €500. However, if my understanding of the amendments is correct, when the 40-hour point is reached a body can refuse a request because it involves too much work.

It can state that maybe it will still do it, but if it does there will be another step-change. This does not seem the most helpful of profiles. If there is to be a charging regime I wonder whether it should be less punitive, particularly at the lower level., such as at seven hours where one moves from a zero charge to a €150 charge.

When the Minister is putting together the ministerial order will he consider the charge per hour? I worked this out to be €20.95 or €21 an hour. I worked backwards to this being the equivalent of an annualised amount of €44,000. The report makes the point this is approximately half the cost of recovery and that the real cost incurred is approximately twice this. This suggests an annualised salary per hour worked of €88,000, which seems very high. After the five free hours, hour 6 should not cost one-six hours but one hour, and perhaps the €21 per hour is punitive. It feels very high. Will the Minister consider these points?

I also have an observation to make on a prevailing mindset and perhaps nothing needs to change. I thought the report was very useful but its prevailing mindset is that responding to freedom of information requests is not a primary role of the State in and of itself. This needs to change. The last sentence of paragraph 7.7 states, "This opportunity cost relates to the time that public servants spend in dealing with FOI requests rather than in carrying out their primary role and responsibilities in relation to the provision of public services". I would very much like to see this mindset changed and reflected in a less expensive and friendlier charging regime, which does not view responding to freedom of information requests as something which distracts public servants from their primary role but as part of their primary role. In a good healthy transparent government and public sector this should be seen as part and parcel of the primary role.

I again emphasise these issues are around the edges. The changes being made are excellent. My questions are whether the step-change can be examined, whether a charge of €21 an hour is punitive and whether anything can be done to change the mindset regarding providing the public with information being part of one of the many primary roles of the Government.

See this speech in context