Deaglán de Bréadún
There is little doubt that the scale of charges imposed for Freedom of Information (FoI) requests will prove "a massive disincentive" to members of the public, according to the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner, Ms Emily O'Reilly.
Giving her first public address since her appointment, Ms O'Reilly said the fees placed new limits on the right of access to "official" information.
"It seems to me that these recent developments may have long-term negative effects for accountability," she told the Institute of European Affairs in Dublin yesterday.
She recalled that, when it was introduced six years ago, the Freedom of Information Act "was acclaimed as one of the best pieces of legislation of its type".
But she added: "In some eyes, the Government's enthusiasm for the principles of openness and transparency has waned considerably."
Under regulations introduced by the Minister for Finance last week, requests for non-personal information will now cost €15 and there are further charges of €75 for an internal appeal, and €150 for a final appeal to the Information Commissioner.
"I have already publicly stated that the progressive nature of these charges may dissuade many people, on grounds of cost, from exercising their rights of appeal under the Act. In fact, I have little doubt that the scale of the charges will prove a massive disincentive to accessing what is a right - information - and, if refused, further access to an independent appeals mechanism.
"In any event, the end of year figures for FOI requests and appeals will either support my thesis or not. My role is to implement the legislation scrupulously and impartially. It is for others to speculate on the motivation of the Government in doing what it did," she said.
Commentators had suggested that some public bodies might refuse requests because they knew the applicant could not afford an appeal: "If I were to uphold a complaint made to me about such a decision, I would be recommending redress for the complainant in question."
While non-personal, or "official", information might be requested by a single individual, it was usually of interest to a wider group, e.g., taxpayers, parents of schoolgoing children or local community groups. New limits had now been placed on the degree of access to such information. "The danger is that accountability of public bodies to the public generally will thus be curtailed," Ms O'Reilly said.
Asked for its reaction to Ms O'Reilly's speech, the Department of Finance said: "We have noted her comments and we have nothing further to say."
However, her speech was welcomed by the Fine Gael leader, Mr Enda Kenny, who said he hoped the Government "will now reconsider the introduction of fees". He added: "I also welcome Ms O'Reilly's intent to be vigilant for officials who refuse requests in the knowledge that the requester may not be in a position to finance an appeal to the Information Commissioner."
He had also written to Ms O'Reilly to express concern that, where an appeal was successful, the fees would not be reimbursed.
"If you, as Information Commissioner, decide to grant an appeal, the requester will have paid €225 to get the matter considered by your Office and will not have that expenditure refunded. Effectively, this refusal is making the consumer pay for the mistakes of public bodies," Mr Kenny wrote.
The European Ombudsman, Mr P Nikiforos Diamandouros, said that it was not appropriate for him to express an opinion on "the practices which pertain at the level of member-states".