To print: Click here or Select File and then Print from your browser's menu

This story was printed from silicon.com, located at http://www.silicon.com/

Story URL: http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39163358,00.htm

Editor's Blog: Don't de-fang the Freedom of Information Act
But I would say that...

By Tony Hallett

Published: Wednesday 18 October 2006

This week news broke that the government likes the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act (as our friends over at Kablenet tell us). News also broke that the government, through Constitutional Affairs Secretary of State - and prime ministerial buddy - Lord Falconer, is proposing making changes, ostensibly to cut the costs of administering FoI requests, though many fear changes will only limit the Act's efficacy. Now how did I start this paragraph?

As The Guardian points out, a possible cost-cap could mean "organisations face a limit on the number of applications".

This would be a bad thing for, say, the BBC, the article goes on to say. Or The Guardian? Or silicon.com??? (We, by the way, had one central department, the Home Office, deny an FoI request this year on the basis of time it would take - though other departments stumped up the same data, in that case about lost laptops.)

You get the idea. Around half of all FoI requests come from the media. My publication has used it to good effect (though we're always looking for ideas, so don't be shy with that Send button). Others have too.

But speak to someone in a government press office and odds are you won't hear such an endorsement. Even with a cap on the cost of requests of £600 - or £450 for local authorities and others in the public sector - it is often seen as a sizeable extra burden, one which stretches far beyond those who speak to journalists.

Now the idea of including civil servants' time reading or consulting with lawyers is being considered. Or limiting the number of requests over a period of time from a particular organisation or individual - arguably fine when stopping a troll with time on their hands and a mischievous mind but not so for any serious media outfit.

Imagine the BBC being limited to one request per month, say?

What's the bottom line here? Plenty will say this isn't about costs and those trying to tie up departments in needless requests but rather about stopping the flow of info.

Let's remember it was this government that brought in the legislation. They did a good thing. And at about £24m I'd say this is decent value for the taxpayer.

What's on the agenda now? Back tracking.

Word of advice: when you get something right - and the government itself has hailed its first year a "success" - stick with it. It's not like we're drowning in policy victories right now.

But then, as a member of the media, they'd say I would say that.