The Coalition Government is about to salvage as much as possible from the wreckage of its Freedom of Information Bill. It miscalculated badly in seeking to roll back the public's right to know by claiming action was necessary to safeguard the efficient and orderly conduct of its business.
A failure to consult with interested parties reflected the one-dimensional nature of that exercise. And the resulting proposals were so pernicious that the principles of openness and transparency that underpinned the original Freedom of Information Act were seriously compromised.
This is not a battle between the media and the Government, although obvious interests are involved. Journalists have, on occasion, erroneously claimed a constitutional right to freedom of expression. The freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution, however, is an individual right and the media are just one of the vehicles through which that right is exercised. The function of the media is to serve the public's right to know, not the interests of journalists.
The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service has made timely and constructive interventions in the public interest. The chairman, Mr Sean Fleming TD, invited the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Murphy, the Secretaries-General who produced a review of the Act and other interested parties to comment on the terms of the proposed legislation.
Arising from those deliberations, the Joint Committee - which has a Government majority - asked the Cabinet yesterday for time to hold further hearings and identified the need for significant amendments.
Three elements of the Bill indicate the FOI regime change under way. A proposal to alter the definition of "Government" to include "a committee of officials" could conceivably extend the scope of Cabinet confidentiality far beyond the original Supreme Court judgment . Giving Secretaries-General the power to certify the extent of a "deliberative process" involving Government business undermines the Cabinet system. The limitation on the rights of citizens to acccess information is also serious.
Unless the Bill allows the electorate a broad overview into how official business is conducted in its name, damage will be caused to the fabric of democracy. The Government could legitimately argue in favour of increasing the exemption period for Cabinet records from 5 to 10 years. But the political discretion involved int the new protections goes too far. Fundamental change is required.