Freedom of Information Act

Watchdog backs FOI with a pat and a prod

Rob Evans and David Hencke
Friday March 25, 2005
The Guardian

Government departments have received at least 7,000 freedom of information requests since the act came into force three months ago, and are already disclosing a large number of documents, the watchdog responsible for policing the legislation said yesterday.

Richard Thomas, the information commissioner, gave an optimistic assessment of the act so far, despite complaints that the government has been abusing the legislation and not disclosing much of substance.

He rejected the argument that the act, which came into force on January 1, should be written off.

"I have been encouraged by how much new material is being released every day," he said.

"The act is already making a real difference in getting public access to previously secret official information. A lot of information is being disclosed. We are kick-starting a change in the culture of secrecy."

He was aware that many departments were agonising over what to disclose, but were eventually releasing documents which could be embarrassing or awkward. "In general, most public bodies are taking [the act] seriously."

He had been impressed by the wide range of information made public, citing documents obtained by parents in North Wales protesting against the planned closure of a school.

Other examples included details of the amount received from parking fines by local councils, books missing from the British Library and NHS use of private hospitals.

This week's publication of the amount of EU agriculture subsidies received by every farmer in Britain was a "significant" disclosure.

Once the information was in the open, it was clear that there had been no valid reason for keeping it secret.

"The act will not be a damp squib, nor will it be the end of civilisation," he said.

People can complain to him if they believe a government body has not released information it should have disclosed.

His officials are scrutinising 285 complaints, the most prominent of which concerns the government's refusal to release the contents of the attorney general's legal advice on the invasion of Iraq.

Mr Thomas has the authority to order public bodies to release information, and he has used it for the first time to require Westminster council in central London to make good its failure to release information in a personal case.

More than 7,000 information requests have been submitted to Whitehall departments, the largest number to the Ministry of Defence and the Cabinet Office, and thousands more have been made to local authorities and NHS trusts, although there is not yet a figure for those areas.

Police forces received more than 2,000 requests in the first six weeks, covering everything from the addresses of released paedophiles - requests that were refused - to neighbourhood policing.

They included the most amusing request: one to the Hampshire constabulary asking how many eligible bachelors in uniform it had and their email addresses, salaries and pension packages.

Health authorities have received many requests, ranging from ward closures to the mortality rates in operations performed by heart surgeons.

Mr Thomas urged public bodies to respond out of "enlightened self-interest".

"In a mature 21st century democracy people are more tolerant of mistakes.

"They are not tolerant of public bodies that are not straight with them. They forgive mistakes. What they want is government departments to be open with them."