Seanad debates

Tuesday, 4 March 2003

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

 

2:30 pm

Maurice Hayes (Independent)

I have some declarations of interest to make before I begin. I am a member of the board of Independent Newspapers and I write for one of its organs. Some of my friends in the field of journalism might not like all of what I am about to say. I am also a former civil servant and some of my former colleagues in that profession may not like what I have to say either.

It is a pity that this subject has become so dramatised. It is an important issue but it is not helped by hyperbole on either side. The world will not fall apart if this Bill is passed. On the other hand, it might be a better one if it was not passed. There are two important safeguards to democracy, one of which is freedom of information and the other is strong Government. It is a question of finding a balance between the two. People have a right to information, but it is not an absolute and unqualified right. Equally, a Government is entitled to a degree of reticence when it is reaching conclusions but, in a sense, that cannot be absolute either. It is a pity that this legislation was not developed at a slower pace. It is a subject which, to coin a phrase, would benefit from mature reflection.

I have no doubt that the high level group is excellent, but it took a rather narrow look at a broad and complex subject. I do not know who are the members of that high level group, but I am sure some of them are good friends of mine and I do not intend to denigrate their efforts by any means. It is a pity the Information Commissioner was not more involved in the discussions in order that his experience could be drawn upon. It would not have been a bad idea to have a senior retired journalist contribute as well.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.