This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/01/freedom-information-act-need-not-be-radically-altered-review-finds
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Freedom of Information Act need not be radically altered, review finds | Freedom of Information Act need not be radically altered, review finds |
(about 1 hour later) | |
Freedom of information requests – used by campaigners and journalists to ask questions of public bodies – should remain free of charge, a report has advised. | |
Following publication of a review of the law(pdf), the Cabinet Office minister Matt Hancock said the FoI Act was “working well” and ruled out legislating to tighten government veto powers – for now. | |
However, there is no plan to extend FoI to include outsourcing firms that profit from public money, as many campaigners had hoped. | However, there is no plan to extend FoI to include outsourcing firms that profit from public money, as many campaigners had hoped. |
Following the review, ministers plan to ensure that public authorities will face a new duty to publish information about how they respond to FoI requests, and new guidance will be issued clarifying when authorities can refuse vexatious requests and how the FoI Act works. | |
The freedom of information commission, which was asked last year to conduct the review, recommended 21 changes to the way the act works, including changes to the time limit and restrictions on the disclosure of information. These have not yet been accepted or rejected by ministers. | |
Recommendations include strengthening the government’s veto, which will give ministers an overriding power to stop information being released. This suggestion follows the decision of the supreme court to release the Prince Charles “spider memos” following a 10-year battle by Rob Evans of the Guardian. | Recommendations include strengthening the government’s veto, which will give ministers an overriding power to stop information being released. This suggestion follows the decision of the supreme court to release the Prince Charles “spider memos” following a 10-year battle by Rob Evans of the Guardian. |
The commission also recommends a 20-day limit for authorities that need to extend the time they have to consider FoI requests; penalties for destroying information requested under the FoI; and clarity on what can be exempted from disclosure on the grounds that it relates to policy formulation or cabinet discussion. | The commission also recommends a 20-day limit for authorities that need to extend the time they have to consider FoI requests; penalties for destroying information requested under the FoI; and clarity on what can be exempted from disclosure on the grounds that it relates to policy formulation or cabinet discussion. |
The FoI commission was asked to examine the act amid concerns within government that “sensitive information” was being inadequately protected. The report said FoI had helped to “change the culture of the public sector”. | |
There had been fears that the commission, which includes long-term opponents of the act, such as Jack Straw, would suggest tightening the law. The report said: “The commission considers that there is no evidence that the act needs to be radically altered, or that the right of access to information needs to be restricted. | There had been fears that the commission, which includes long-term opponents of the act, such as Jack Straw, would suggest tightening the law. The report said: “The commission considers that there is no evidence that the act needs to be radically altered, or that the right of access to information needs to be restricted. |
“In some areas, the commission is persuaded that the right of access should be increased. More generally, the commission would like to see a significant reduction in the delays in the process whereby without good reason requests can go unresolved for several years. | “In some areas, the commission is persuaded that the right of access should be increased. More generally, the commission would like to see a significant reduction in the delays in the process whereby without good reason requests can go unresolved for several years. |
“We have not been persuaded that there are any convincing arguments in favour of charging fees for requests and therefore we make no proposals for change.” | “We have not been persuaded that there are any convincing arguments in favour of charging fees for requests and therefore we make no proposals for change.” |
Hancock said there would be no wholesale changes to the act. “After 10 years, we took the decision to review the Freedom of Information Act and we have found it is working well,” he said. | Hancock said there would be no wholesale changes to the act. “After 10 years, we took the decision to review the Freedom of Information Act and we have found it is working well,” he said. |
“We will not make any legal changes to FoI. We will spread transparency throughout public services, making sure all public bodies routinely publish details of senior pay and perks. After all, taxpayers should know if their money is funding a company car or a big payoff.” | |
Previous version
1
Next version