Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

-----replicated. I cannot remember what the point was but I will come back to it. The Deputy made two further points, one of which pertained to the proposed section 27(4), which concerns personal information. That provision is mirroring the 1997 Act and it is a matter of reasonableness. All personal information will be free, by and large. This has been the position since 1997 but there must be some barrier in respect of reasonableness. For example, were one to request every item of information the public service possesses about oneself, there could be tens of thousands of items of information. Is it reasonable to make such a request and to get every Department and agency of the State beavering away on that? There must be an element of reasonableness in this regard. I am advised - my Department trawled through this - that this provision is seldom used. It is just for when someone makes an extraordinary request. I have seen requests from people in respect of genealogical pursuits, for example, where they basically wanted agencies of the State to draw up a family tree for them by going through every record in their family line going back 500 years. I am advised I should retain this provision simply to have some semblance of reasonableness with regard to personal information. However, by and large, it would be a rare exception to have any charge at all for personal information. Moreover, where it is charged, it will only be an actual cost of duplicating and finding that information. As for the electronic payment question, that certainly is what I intend to do and it will be part of the code of conduct. It will not be a requirement but will be where people wish to do it electronically and this obviously is what the Government is migrating towards. I still cannot remember what was the point I was trying to make with regard to the 1997 Act in response to the Deputy's first point, although it might come back to me.

Deputy Catherine Murphy mentioned cultural change and I agree with her entirely. It is part of a suite of measures in which the Government seeks change. I have stated all along that having a common code of practice, having a requirement for trained FOI officers and having a consistency regarding FOI across the public service is almost as important as the content of the legislation because then, everybody will know what is expected of him or her. Moreover, there will be a common scrutiny of freedom of information, with a central FOI unit within my Department being responsible for that oversight. This will be very important and I agree with the Deputy that the aim is to have a mindset of openness. This goes to the point made ultimately by Deputy McDonald on moving towards open data and why I would have anything here. One must get to that point and must have systems. I already have been talking to the chief information officers about common systems to publish datasets, in order that information is made available more freely. Deputy Murphy also mentioned the different level of ceilings.

This approach mirrors the position in the United Kingdom where a lower cap applies in respect of the local government system than in respect of the central government system.

See this speech in context