Tom Parlon (Laois-Offaly, Progressive Democrats)

—it was regarded as radical and reforming and had the potential to make a significant contribution to the way public bodies conduct their business and how they relate to the public. By and large, the Act has achieved this. No Member has given credit to the fact that since the Act was passed, 67 bodies came under its remit but that number has expanded to almost 380. One of the first jobs I did as Minister of State was to extend it to a further 20 bodies, one of which was the National Roads Authority. The Government has embraced the Freedom of Information Act and has extended the number of bodies that come within its remit. There is a recognition that legislation which impacts to the extent the Freedom of Information Act does on all public administration cannot be frozen in time. We have had five years' experience of the freedom of information legislation during which time it has been kept under constant review. A number of amendments were deemed necessary.

Some Members did not have as much opportunity as others to read the legislation but the Government has decided to extend the period of protection for Cabinet records. Members have different perceptions of what was said but I heard a number of Members opposite accept that the move to shorten the period from five to ten years' is not a bad one and that people do not have a major difficulty with it.

The Government has proposed a number of limited measures to protect records which are intimately bound to the exercise of collective ministerial responsibility, such as ministerial communications relating to live Cabinet agenda items and records of committees set up in direct support of Cabinet. If Members look earnestly at the legislation, they will see that limited changes have been made.

The experience abroad supports a high level of protection for information which, although not directly linked to discussions at Cabinet level—

(Interruptions).