Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during October 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28177/07]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information applications received by his Department in the first ten months of 2007; the way these figures compare with each year since 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29413/07]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach the number of requests under the Freedom of Information Act 1987 received by his Department in 2007 up to the end of October and the comparable number for 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30964/07]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.

I propose to circulate in the Official Report the information requested by the Deputies on the statistics regarding freedom of information requests received in my Department. All freedom of information applications received in my Department are processed by statutorily designated officials in accordance with the 1997 and 2003 Acts. In accordance with those statutes, I have no role in processing individual applications.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Taoiseach have the numbers concerning how many freedom of information applications were received, how many were rejected and the reasons for their rejection? I know the Taoiseach does not see these matters himself and that there is a process for dealing with them.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The figure for last year was 54, while the projected figure for this year, given that there are just a few weeks left, will be in the order of 60. Most of the applications are either accepted or partly accepted, while others are referred elsewhere. In my Department, however, most of the freedom of information applications concern straightforward issues — they are not quite as complex as those covering other Departments — and are accepted or partially accepted.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have asked this question before and the Taoiseach will probably answer me in the same way again, but where a person's application under the Freedom of Information Act is rejected and their appeal is allowed, they are still charged. As regards his Department, does the Taoiseach think that, in fairness, where an appeal is allowed a person should be charged?

On a wider issue, but still related to freedom of information, the Taoiseach is aware that one cannot obtain documentation prior to the introduction of the Act. As regards yesterday's business, which is the topic of some conversation, does the Taoiseach consider it appropriate to release all papers concerning the casino issue so that people can make up their minds about it? The casino was never built, yet those papers cannot be obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. People have claimed that the Taoiseach was involved in this matter, while he claims he was not involved in any wrongdoing. Would it not be a good idea to release all those papers because the issue is dead as an infrastructural matter? People could then be allowed to make up their own minds on it.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On the first issue, as I said before, there are not many appeals concerning freedom of information applications to my Department, but there is a large cost involved. First, if it is a personal matter, as with most of the cases we deal with, there is no charge whatsoever. The €15 fee is modest compared to the average administrative cost, which is approximately €425. If the matter goes to the appeals commissioner there is a final stage whereby somebody can still get the report before the final report and at that stage there is no cost. People have copped on to that mechanism because I notice a number of cases go to that stage. Other than that, the costs involved must be reflected.

As regards old cases, it is difficult enough to get old files in my Department, not to mention other Departments. The Department of Finance has fairly good records and it gave me a report on that matter, which was a live issue with a number of organisations for an extensive period. While a number of points were made, the issue came down to whether, in 1994, I had given approval for a process to allow a confidential agreement. To be frank, if I had been asked to give approval to that, I am sure I would have, but I was not asked. Nobody was asked at that time. An Post — the national lottery — went ahead and did that for a five-month period in 1994 and in 1998, but I was not involved. If I was asked, however — I will be honest about it — I see no reason that I would not have given it, looking at the papers. In 1998, the then Minister was asked for approval in advance and he gave approval. That is all it was about. The totally unfair allegation was that there was something wrong with that, but there was nothing wrong with it whatsoever. These things get two days' headlines and then the journalist would not admit that he was wrong, but he is wrong. I did nothing wrong and even if I had given approval it would not have been wrong.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Going back over the figures on the number of freedom of information applications made to the Department of the Taoiseach, there is a marked difference in the numbers that were made subsequent to 2003. In 2002, 146 such applications were made, while the figure for 2003 was 142. In 2004, the figure dropped dramatically to 45. There were 54 last year and the Taoiseach says the figure for 2007 will be 60. The one thing that occurred in terms of the higher and lower figures was the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Act 2003, which introduced a scale of fees for making applications. It is €15 for the application, €75 for a departmental review and €150 for an appeal to the commissioner. As Deputy Kenny said, that is non-refundable even if one wins the appeal.

The Information Commissioner has drawn attention to these fees and has pointed out that they do not apply in other jurisdictions. She has recommended that they be dropped. What consideration has the Taoiseach given to this recommendation? The fees clearly have an impact on the number of applications being made. Perhaps this was the intent of the amending legislation but it is certainly discouraging people from making FOI requests. Nothing else explains the difference in the figures before and after 2003.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In my Department, the figure has levelled out at approximately 50 to 60. When the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Act 2003 was enacted, there was quite a number of people endeavouring to obtain information and there was a huge surge of applications. Second, companies and individuals were doing trawling exercises with a view to using the information they obtained commercially to the benefit of a client base. This is partly why the changes were made.

The FOI system is a matter for the Department of Finance in the first instance and I have no plans to review it. The system that was introduced in 2003 followed a review that considered carefully all the options that were available, as stated correctly by Deputy Gilmore. A fee of €15 is very modest, particularly when compared to the administrative fee for processing an application in 2003, that is, €425. I am not sure if it has been updated since then. Nobody would agree that the fee is unreasonable and discourages responsible FOI requests.

One should remember that all FOI requests for personal information are free. It is also important to point out that there is no charge for the time taken in making a decision on an FOI request. In most other jurisdictions there is a charge levied in addition to the application fee. This would be a bit unreasonable but we do not have it here. There was a significant decline in the number of requests in my Department but the figure has increased again.

It costs €75 for an internal appeal and €150 for an appeal to the Information Commissioner. There are significant reductions for medical card holders, for whom the fees for internal appeals and appeals to the Information Commissioner amount to €25 and €50, respectively. Appeals for personal information are entirely exempt from fees. An appeal to the Information Commissioner involves a quasi-judicial process and in most cases it can take many months and entail considerable work and effort back and forward. The fee is a fair reflection of the work done.

It is important to note that a person who appeals to the Information Commissioner receives a preliminary decision that represents a fairly accurate reflection of the likely final decision. This is the point I was making to Deputy Kenny. Even towards the very end of the process, the requester can withdraw the appeal and obtain a full refund of the fees charged. Some 30% of the appeals made to the Information Commissioner are withdrawn at this stage. The system is fair and not unduly expensive. Requests are entirely free if personal information is being sought. Most requests concern individuals or staff issues.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach agree that the fee should at least be refunded where the appeal is successful? This is reasonable. I cannot understand why the fee should be retained if the appeal is successful.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a matter for the Department of Finance. In any review that takes place, I will ask the Minister for Finance to take on board Deputy Gilmore's views on the matter.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To return to the kernel of these questions, the statistics, is the Taoiseach aware that the number of FOI requests made across the public sector in 2006 was 32% lower than in 2002? This points to the impact of the amending legislation of 2003. Requests for official and policy information as opposed to requests for personal information, in respect of which fees do not apply, as the Taoiseach stated, dropped by 55% between 2002 and 2006. Does the Taoiseach not accept that the statistics stand very solid in support of a comprehensive review of all the matters pertaining to the FOI process, particularly the impact of the amending legislation of 2003? In light of this information, will the Taoiseach undertake to ensure that a comprehensive review be undertaken to put the FOI system back on track in accordance with the manner intended at the outset? The cold statistics to hand would be damning enough if we were considering comparable numbers of bodies to which the legislation applied between 2002 and 2006 but they are even more grave considering that, annually over this period, more bodies were added to the list of bodies to which the legislation applied. In light of this, will the Taoiseach indicate his intent to carry out the required review and make appropriate amendments to the current legislation to allow citizens, communities and interested bodies make appropriate inquiries as they would wish?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I remind Members that the determination of fees is a matter for the Minister for Finance. The Taoiseach is only responsible for FOI requests concerning his own Department.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regarding my Department, when the legislation was enacted in 2003 there was obviously pent-up demand on the part of individuals to make FOI requests. This has not changed and any individual seeking information about himself, in the first instance or on appeal, is not subject to a charge. There is no difficulty about this and the changes made in the 2003 Act have no bearing on it whatever. The legislation did have an effect on individuals who engaged in a trawl for non-personal information. The legislation was never designed so people could do this. It was not enacted so somebody could seek information on whatever came into his head and have public servants moved from other jobs in order to find it. Its purpose was to allow people obtain information that was important or which pertained to policy. It was not to allow people to do significant trawls to see if they could find useful information and then try to use it for commercial purposes. This was happening and the Act was to counter it. Such trawling was not unusual and it happened in other countries also. People had to allow the Act to settle down for a while and carry out their search.

The Freedom of Information (Amendment) Act 2003 allowed us to bring about some kind of controllable order to address the matter of people spuriously sending in FOI requests when it was totally free to do so. The extension of the Act to public bodies has brought about a great improvement in the system. It is a matter for the Department of Finance. Last year saw the biggest ever extension of the FOI Act in that it was made applicable to 137 more bodies. The level of openness and transparency is such that there are now 520 bodies covered by the legislation compared to 67 before the 2003 Act. The goal of the legislation has been achieved and it should be hailed as an enormous success.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach made the point very well in his reply, where I had indicated that the statistics do not show the whole picture, that the extent of those bodies to which the freedom of information legislation applies is huge. There is an almost 800% increase in the number of bodies and yet the statistics show a huge reduction in take-up.

Does the Taoiseach not accept that the Information Commissioner's recommendations, based on her experience in that position, merit action on the part of Government? There is a requirement to carry out the review that people recommend. Does he accept that nobody here has suggested that the initial intent was to open up opportunities for people to trawl for entertainment purposes or whatever? Nobody has suggested that all the fees be absolutely scrapped, but they should be more token than punitive. Certainly when one moves towards the appeals process, the fee is prohibitive at €150.

There is a requirement, therefore, for a review, for which people here are arguing. Will the Taoiseach please take that on board and acknowledge the collective lobby of the Opposition groupings that are reflective of the Information Commissioner's recommendations in this instance? Will he indicate whether he will conduct the necessary review? Based on the information he has shared with us, there is a huge increase in the number of bodies and a significant reduction in the uptake so there must be something wrong.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The determination of fees and the inclusion of further bodies in the Schedule are matters for the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance, not for the Taoiseach.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Each year the Information Commissioner produces an excellent report which is examined by the Department of Finance. The Department carries out that review on an annual basis and it is a matter for it to make changes.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a great honour to be elected to this House and to be able to ask the Taoiseach of this country a question. Does he believe it is right that I, as an elected representative for the people of County Mayo, should have to pay for information that concerns a citizen in this State? Will he consider that in the context of the freedom of information legislation?

I made a freedom of information request to the Minister for Transport on the Shannon issue. A newspaper got the information after I had made the request but it had to pay for it. I am open to correction but I believe I was asked for €300 or €400 for the information. I do not have a budget for that.

A serious complaint was made about a man to the local authority by a neighbour. All the man wanted to know was who had made the complaint. He had to make a request under the freedom of information legislation and had to pay €15. The local authority then asked for a further fee to examine the matter. That is not right. If somebody makes a complaint in a letter and signs it, the local authority should not require someone to make a freedom of information request but should just give the information. If I want information from the Taoiseach or his Department, I should not have to pay for it.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not wish to labour the point but the question of the determination of fees——

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a very good question.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a very good question but it is one for the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance. That is the difficulty.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach wants to answer it.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If a Deputy wants information about something relating to my Department, he or she may table a parliamentary question and we will try to answer that.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I made the request to the Minister's colleague beside him and I was asked to pay €400 for the information.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If an individual wants information about his or her records, he or she does not have to pay.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am talking about public information.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If he or she wants information about somebody else, one is getting into a different area.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The right to ask a question is very important in a democracy.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree.

Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A group from County Kerry made a freedom of information request on operations in Valentia and in Malin Head in my backyard, but that information was not forthcoming even after paying the freedom of information fee. I know it is not directly related to the Taoiseach's Department but the Minister beside him is at liberty to furnish that information.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I suggest, Deputy McHugh, that you deal with the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, during Question Time in that regard. You know as well I as do that we cannot wander all over the place.

Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do. I refer to the issue of whether to pay money for information. We talk about Communism and Stalinist Russia, but it is impossible to get information here. A meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges will be held next week. As a new Deputy, I find it very difficult to get information.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sometimes the less one knows, the better.

Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not worried about myself but about the people. The people might not be as understanding on that point.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sometimes freedom of information requests fall within the ambit of a Government decision, that is, between two Departments. In such cases, does the Taoiseach not accept that his Department has a role to sort the competences as one would expect in regard to a Cabinet matter? It is best if I give an example in regard to the Constitution and the Minister for Education and Science. Every child is entitled to attend school, but the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has argued that if people have student visas, their children cannot attend school. Members of the immigration bureau visited school children in their classes and told them they should be removed and that if they cannot attend private education, they could be deported with their parents. I asked a parliamentary question on that matter and I accept it was sent to the Departments of Education and Science and Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We will leave the contradiction aside, but in such a case, the issue is getting information.

Is the Taoiseach concerned that many of the quangos that have come into existence have made themselves immune to freedom of information requests? This is not about costs but about ordinary citizens submitting requests on policy matters. The process is long and unwieldy.

The Minister for Transport will be aware of issues concerning CIE. It is impossible to elicit from CIE how it decided to sell its property rather than seek money from capital funds for the national development plan. I presume the Taoiseach is interested in the national development plan. Citizens are interested in how CIE decided to sell off its sites to provide money for public transport. The Minister for Transport will answer my letters but how do I get an answer from a body such as CIE that will not answer me? It will answer if the Department of Transport writes to it.

There is a string of quangos to which power has leaked from Parliament. This is a matter for the Taoiseach and the Government. I am very amenable to co-operating in this regard, but I repeat something I said earlier in this session, that is, Parliament is constantly leaking its powers and responsibilities to unaccountable bodies that are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The general policy in regard to freedom of information is a matter for the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance, as Deputy Higgins knows.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not about cost, it is about scope.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is only responsible for matters relating to his Department.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Surely his Ministers sometimes express their concerns to him on a good day.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about a bad day?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If we get a freedom of information request in my Department on which we cannot give all the information, we part grant the information. Rather than ignore it, we at least try to deal with the policy issues with which we can deal. In approximately one quarter of all requests, we would at least give the policy information we can give. In terms of policy and without straying into other areas, Members of the House may ask parliamentary questions and there is the freedom of information process. In regard to CIE and major policy questions, however, such a body is answerable to committees of the House, to which it must answer for its policy decisions. That is a method of trying to get them to answer these questions.