Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is here often enough, so we will not blame him for his absence. We might not allow some other Ministers the same latitude. I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Simon Harris.

The Government often talks about restoring FOI. Some 18,000 FOI requests are made every year and a significant volume of information has been given out every year since the original FOI Act was introduced, and indeed since the amending Act in 2003. In this debate, that reality is often ignored. There is a huge amount of information out there and most records that people might want are available on request.

The FOI process is extremely important in holding public bodies and officials to account, and I welcome many of the changes in this Bill. The Bill underwent a complicated legislative process in the Dáil before coming to this House. Fianna Fáil did not support the Bill in its original form, as it would have brought even more restrictions on FOI in terms of the charges that were originally proposed by the Government. I am glad that there was such a deliberative process in the Dáil to examine this legislation line-by-line, to force the Minister and the Government to go back and adapt it, and to listen to what was being said by interested parties, by the Opposition, and even by some members of the Government.

Some of the quirks of FOI have annoyed me over the years. For example, the fee certainly does block some requests, but the need to pay by cheque is a bigger barrier to access. Chequebooks are no longer issued routinely and it is difficult to go down to a post office and get a postal order, although I encourage people to buy as many postal orders as they can from their local post office. That definitely had a dampening effect on the type of information that was being released. However, a huge amount of information has been revealed to the public, and rightly so. In some cases it was shocking information which we are glad was revealed under the existing legislation.

The FOI Bill significantly extends the range of bodies likely to be covered by FOI and the categories of documents affected. I am particularly glad that during that legislative process in the Dáil, EirGrid was added to the list of bodies subject to FOI. However, port companies are listed as exempt in this legislation. This should not be the case, particularly for the smaller port companies which are akin to local authorities as they are not really commercial. They are not operating in an open marketplace in which one must protect commercially-sensitive material. I am talking about Drogheda Port, possibly Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company and Galway and New Ross ports. Waterford, Shannon and Dublin ports are large, but Wicklow Port is not.

I do not understand why Wicklow, Drogheda and some of the smaller port companies are not included under FOI legislation. They function as local authorities for the areas they cover, as well as running the ports. The Minister for transport is currently examining proposals to bring the ports under the remit of local authorities. If that were to happen, some of the smaller ports would then be subject to FOI, so why not do that now? Those port companies should be examined to the same extent as the local authorities beside them are examined. I will be proposing amendments on this topic next week. I am sure that the process of bringing ports under the remit of local authorities is well under way and will happen for some of the smaller companies. I hope it will happen, as some of the smaller ports are more suited to existence under a local authority structure than as independent semi-State companies.

Section 31 of the Bill relates to the issue of parliamentary papers. There is a specific exemption from FOI for Members of the European Parliament and members of local authorities. While there is a constitutional provision in relation to the private papers of Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas, there is no exemption from FOI. I do not believe the Houses have Standing Orders relating to this issue, although perhaps they have. My concern is not about the material usually obtained under FOI about Members of the Houses, but rather information about constituents. The private papers of Members of the Oireachtas would cover personal information on constituents, which I hope would not be obtained. This is just a query. I do not believe it is a major issue and I am certainly not seeking any reduction in the transparency expected of Members. I would like as much information as possible to be made public. However, the constituency or legislative work of Members should not be subject to FOI.

Having said that, as I have said before, people who meet us in Leinster House should be subject to FOI. They should all have to sign in and the signing-in book should be open to the public.