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 May 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24265/08]

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

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department since January 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29482/08]

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

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach the number of requests received by his Department under the Freedom of Information Act 1997 in the first eight months of 2008; if he will provide comparable figures for the same period in respect of each year since 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29621/08]

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

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department since September 2007 to date in 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32336/08]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.

The following table sets out the information requested by the Deputies regarding freedom of information requests received by my Department. All such requests are processed by statutorily designated officials in accordance with the Freedom of Information Acts 1997 and 2003. Under those Acts, I have no role in regard to the processing of individual applications.

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

The Office of the Information Commissioner received 10,704 requests in 2007, a decrease of 42%, or 7,739, on 2003. The reason given was the introduction of fees. The Information Commissioner has requested on a number of occasions that the scale and structure of fees be reviewed. The reason for this is obvious. The commissioner makes that point that among eight comparable jurisdictions Ireland is one of only two that charges for freedom of information appeals. For example, Ontario charges €16 in comparison with Ireland which charges €150 in this regard.

The Taoiseach, when Minister for Finance, dismissed a claim by the Information Commissioner, Ms O'Reilly, for a reduction in fees for freedom of information requests and appeals which led in her opinion to a culture of secrecy. Is the Taoiseach, in his new capacity, prepared to reconsider the Ombudsman's recommendations and suggestions in so far as they apply to his Department and others? Also, does he consider that when an appeal is lodged and justified the fee charged by the State should be waived?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Ceann Comhairle has pointed out on previous occasions, the Minister for Finance bears responsibility for the Freedom of Information Acts. I am answering in respect of the operation of the Acts in my Department. Regarding Deputy Kenny's more general question in regard to fees, there is no charge for personal information. The up-front fee is €15 and the internal review fee is €75. A review by the Information Commission costs €150, with reduced fees for persons on limited means.

The regulation allows for a refund in the case of a request being withdrawn. In response to criticisms on the introduction of fees, it is argued that any decline in the number of requests that can be attributed to such a modest fee would fully vindicate the Minister's view that a better balance needed to be struck and that fees would result in a greater appreciation of the service and more considered and responsible use of the Act. The level of fees has not been increased since introduced in July 2003. In my opinion, this rebalancing was necessary to ensure the Act is used as envisaged. The fact that fees are being charged, other than for personal information for which there is no fee, ensures that people when requesting information are judicious in the trawl and the work they ask of the service in the provision of that information.

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

Where a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act is disallowed and is subsequently successful following an appeal to the Information Commissioner the fees should be refunded. I have two further questions for the Taoiseach.

In 2005, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service met with the Information Commissioner to assess the impact of fees on the Freedom of Information Act. The Taoiseach will recall the report in this regard. The committee subsequently wrote to the Taoiseach, when Minister for Finance, seeking to have the matter addressed as urgently as possible and to have legislation introduced at the first available opportunity. Nothing happened in this regard during the remainder of the Taoiseach's tenure as Minister for Finance or since his successor was appointed. Will the Government consider this formal request from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service for the introduction of legislation arising from its analysis with the Information Commission of the fees' impact on the Freedom of Information Act?

A number of bodies remain outside the freedom of information remit. The Information Commissioner has stated there is no reason the Central Applications Office, the Adoption Board, the State Claims Agency, the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority should remain outside the remit of the Freedom of Information Acts. The Garda Síochána is also mentioned in this regard. I recognise some of those bodies would clearly have sensitive information that could well be outside the remit of a normal request under freedom of information. Does the Taoiseach share the view of the Information Commissioner that some of those should also be included, at least in part, under the Freedom of Information Act and the kind of information which would be of use to the public, without being State-sensitive or whatever, should be included under the Act?

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

In truth, these are matters for the Minister for Finance unless the Taoiseach wants to be of assistance.

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

I am sorry.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is the difficulty. I have information specifically relating to my Department, but the general policy issues regarding a possible extension, revision of fees or amending legislation as a result of reports from various Oireachtas committees or from the Information Commissioner, who, in her annual report, sets out her views, are a matter for Government and the Oireachtas to decide. Recommendations, by their very nature, are not mandatory.

I am not in a position to provide information on the general wider policy issue, except to make an observation. During my time as Minister for Finance, if I am not incorrect in saying so, we made some decisions to considerably broaden the number of organisations coming under the freedom of information legislation. That was a result of a review which was brought to our attention and which provided for many of them. Over time, there has been a steady extension of the bodies to which the Freedom of Information Act applies. That happened during my tenure, as I am sure it happened during the tenure of predecessors in the office since the Freedom of Information Act was enacted.

With regard to the question of appeals investigated by the Information Commissioner, in respect of my Department since the introduction of the Freedom of Information Act in April 1998, a total of 23 requests, or less than 2%, have been investigated by the Information Commissioner. Of these, a decision not to release records was upheld in five, a decision to part release records was made in four cases, a decision to release records in full was made in three cases and the applications were withdrawn in ten cases. There is one case currently under investigation by the Information Commissioner.

In respect of the previous query on the fees issue, an appeal to the Information Commissioner is a quasi-judicial process that can require many months to complete and can entail a considerable amount of work. The cost is €75 for an internal fee and €150 for an appeal to the Information Commissioner. Those fees are a fair reflection of the nature of the appeals process and of the costs and time involved.

It is important to note that a person who appeals to the commissioner may receive a preliminary decision which gives a good indication of the likely final decision. Even at that late stage in the process, the requester can withdraw the appeal and obtain a full refund of fees. I understand that 30% of appeals made to the Office of the Information Commissioner are withdrawn in that respect.

The question of the extension of the Freedom of Information Act to public bodies is, as I stated, an ongoing process undertaken by the Department of Finance. In 2006 we saw the biggest ever extension of the Act, when it was extended to a further 137 bodies, which means there are over 520 bodies now covered by FOI compared with 67 when the Act first came into operation ten years ago. Arrangements are under way in the Department of Finance to prepare for the extension of FOI to a further group of bodies, including the Law Reform Commission, the last remaining body under the aegis of my Department to be included. I expect the Minister for Finance will have an announcement to make in this regard in due course.

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

I wish to ask the Taoiseach about a particular decision made by the Information Commissioner on 10 October last dealing with a Cabinet document relating to the Cabinet's consideration of Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions. It decided the document should be released under the Freedom of Information Act and that European access to environmental information regulations superseded our domestic laws and practices that Cabinet documents are covered by Cabinet confidentiality and not released.

In respect of that decision, has the document concerned been released to the applicant or is it the Government's intention to release the document? Is it the Government's intention to appeal the decision made by the Information Commissioner?

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

Unless the Taoiseach can be of assistance, this is far beyond the ambit of these questions.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I can be of some assistance. The Deputy is referring to a recent ruling by the Information Commissioner regarding environmental information that ordered a release of a record disclosing Cabinet discussions. Following consultations with the Attorney General's office, it has been decided that an appeal should be taken in that case.

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

The decision by the Information Commissioner that a Cabinet document should be released is highly significant. On what basis will the Government appeal the decision?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Information Commissioner found that the directive on public access to environmental information does not contain any provisions that enable Cabinet discussion on emissions into the environment to remain confidential. In her view, the regulations that transpose the directive, as well as the provisions in the Constitution in respect of Cabinet confidentiality, conflict with the directive. In these circumstances, she considers that the directive's provisions should have direct effect.

We have been directed to release our record, which contains details of discussions at a Cabinet meeting on emissions into the environment. The appeal is being considered as a result of advice from the Attorney General. In our opinion and that of the Attorney General, this is a matter for the courts on which to make a decision, rather than a holder of a statutory office.

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

How many of the recommendations in the Information Commissioner's report of March 2007 have been accepted by the Government? Has it accepted any recommendations to improve the working of the freedom of information process? For example, the Taoiseach spoke about appeals and the cost of same. Has he given consideration to refunding the cost of those appeals against any public body which have been upheld by the Information Commissioner? Is the Taoiseach aware that the enforcement records of the Health and Safety Authority were removed from the scope of the Act in 2005? One of the Information Commissioner's recommendations was that this should be restored. The Taoiseach should indicate the number of measures she has commended that have been adopted by the Government, as well as commenting on the two specific issues.

I understand the Taoiseach's Department has oversight responsibility in respect of the working of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, which was established at the end of last year by the former Taoiseach. A recent freedom of information request was made requesting information on international travel by members of the aforementioned committee members. While I do not know whether it was made directly to the Department of the Taoiseach, it certainly is the establishing Department of the committee. I understand that this request applied to all Members of the Dáil. In this Deputy's case, I noted the freedom of information request referred to international travel and was specific to air and sea travel. However, after 11 years as a Dáil Deputy, the only return from me as a member of that committee was in respect of travel to attend the Good Friday Agreement anniversary conference in Belfast earlier this year.

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

The Deputy is imparting information, rather than seeking it.

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

Such travel was returned as being international travel in that specific freedom of information request. The Taoiseach should examine that practice. I do not consider travel between here and Belfast to constitute international travel and I do not think the Taoiseach does either.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will check into the last point made by the Deputy. I do not think that Tyrone playing Kerry was an international match either.

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

I agree fully.

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

It certainly was not.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The wider general policy questions raised by the Deputy are best directed to the Minister for Finance, who has oversight responsibility. I replied earlier to the Leader of the Opposition on the question of fees where a successful appeal is made to the Information Commissioner. Rather than restating my reply, an appeal to the Information Commissioner is a quasi-judicial process. I am unsure whether Deputy Ó Caoláin was in the House when I gave my reply to Deputy Kenny but it is on the record.

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

I am specifically interested in whether fees will be refunded where the appeal is upheld by the Information Commissioner.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My earlier response was that it is important to note that a person who appeals to the commissioner may receive a preliminary decision which gives a good indication of the likely final decision. Even at that late stage in the process, the requester can withdraw the appeal and obtain a full refund of fees. That option is used in 30% of cases as a means of getting a refund prior to receiving a final decision.

It is correct to say that there is not an explicit right to the return of fees if a matter is left with the Information Commissioner and the final appeal is successful. There is an intermediate stage when, having received the preliminary decision, one can then apply for the withdrawal of the fee before the final decision is made. The preliminary decision usually gives a good indication of the likely final decision. The preliminary decision process provides an opportunity for people to have the fees returned rather than waiting for the appeal to be formally declared successful or otherwise.