The Labour Party has called on the Government to extend the current Freedom of Information Act (FoI) until 2004, hours before the Government proposal goes before the Seanad.
In an alternative FoI Bill published this morning by Labour, the exemption on the release of Cabinet papers would also continue or this period, but in April 2004 the original five-year deadline would come begin. For example, qualifying cabinet papers from April 1997 or earlier would become available.
|
This contrasts to the Government's proposal, which would see the five-year deadline come into effect immediately.
Ms Joan Burton, Labour spokeswoman on finance, said this morning that extending the current Act until next year would allow for an "extensive consultation period" with parities that use the Act and the Information Commissioner.
"We are offering the Bill to the government in the hope that they will take it on board and run with this rather than their own regressive Bill," Ms Burton said.
"We hope they will do so, but we can guarantee that if they do not, the Labour Party will oppose the government's legislation with all the parliamentary resources at our disposal".
Under the Government proposed amendment, significant restrictions to the Freedom of Information Act - including curbs on the publication of correspondence between Ministers would be introduced.
Crucially, requests to see correspondence between Ministers will be refused in future if Departments rule that publication would affect "the free exchange of views between Ministers".
Additionally, all FOI applications will be subject to a flat fee of €20, along with any other charges needed to pay for photocopying and for the time needed to compile the reply.
"These changes have been proposed by the government without any consultation with the Oireachtas, with the media, or with other users of the Freedom of Information Act," Ms Burton said.
"A small group of senior civil servants, who inevitably will have been influenced by their own priorities and their own working background, should not be the only ones to determine what changes, if any, are to be made to the Act".