Seanad debates

Tuesday, 4 March 2003

Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2003: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

2:30 pm

Photo of Paul CoghlanPaul Coghlan (Fine Gael)

Is that right? I thank the Senator. Such a group would not be known for its commitment to openess. They only met in secret. The commissioner and everyone who used the legislation were ignored. The Government is rolling back on progress. It was a Government of Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party which initiated the measure and it is hard to understand the present rolling back. The proposed curbs on the materials of working groups and discovery notes to Ministers will mean that, in future, the public will have no means of knowing when the Cabinet acted against official advice – more is the pity. The right of access to official information should not be regarded as a privilege afforded by Government but a fundamental right in our modern democracy which is funded by the taxpayer.

The charge will be that the Government is doing everything to avoid, at any cost, embarrassing revelations of the truth about its activities. Every objective commentator regards this measure as heralding a bad day for democracy. The Taoiseach introduced the Freedom of Information Act as a catalyst for lasting change in the history of the public service. At the time openness, transparency and accountability had become the new gods but this measure is a total about turn. It is a stumble, if not a large step back, in the other direction. We are limiting sight and vision. The blinds and shutters are coming back into vogue.

A secretive review of the Act must be something of a joke, if not a downright mockery. The Information Commissioner, Mr. Kevin Murphy, in reviewing the Act last year, feared that some elements of officialdom were showing signs of fatigue towards the legislation. We now know that fatigue permeates the higher echelons of the State service and that the Cabinit has become affected. The publication of Cabinet papers is to be delayed for ten years. The restriction on papers dealing with security on Northern Ireland was already in place and did not need to be included in the Bill.

The Minister for Finance is an interesting case in point. He has frequently disregarded official advice which is refreshing. The former Taoiseach, Mr. Albert Reynolds, did the same in his day. It might not have been as refreshing in his case. They were both perfectly entitled to do so, although I find myself more in accord with the Minister for Finance than with others. In future we will not be able to know if a Minister disagreed with advice. Whatever about Cabinet papers, letters between Ministers about Cabinet issues should not be covered by the Act. They are not Cabinet decisions and should not be brought within the scope of the Bill, as is happening. Reports from Cabinet sub-committees and officials will also remain private. I do not see the reason that should be so.

One of the Government's problems appears to be that the Information Commissioner's recommendations are binding, while in his role as Ombudsman his recommendations are not binding. I wish to quote from interview with Mr. Kevin Murphy on his role as Information Commissioner – some Members may have already read it, but others may not – in an eminent journal, Public Affairs Ireland.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.