THE FREEDOM of Information Act (FOI), implemented in 1998, has helped to change a culture of secrecy that for decades surrounded much of the operation of government and public administration, and to replace it with one of greater openness.
The ideal set by John Bruton on becoming taoiseach in 1994, was for government to operate “as transparently as if it were working behind a pane of glass”. Today citizens enjoy greater access to official information held by government departments and State bodies. This has ensured more public accountability and facilitated debate on matters that might otherwise have remained hidden. However, Information Commissioner Emily O’Reilly believes more now needs to be done – and quickly.
Introducing her annual report for 2011, Ms O’Reilly reminded the Coalition parties of their strong commitment to political reform in the programme for government. This includes a pledge to reverse changes made to FOI legislation in 2003 that greatly reduced the effectiveness of FOI; by restricting access to government records, by exempting more official documents from public disclosure, and by charging for FOI requests seeking non-personal information. The Government in its programme is also committed to expanding the scope of FOI legislation to include the administrative side of the Garda Síochána, and to cover “all bodies significantly funded from the public purse”. Two financial bodies that the Information Commissioner believes should be covered in the amended FOI legislation are the Central Bank, and the National Asset Management Agency. Nama chairman Frank Daly disagrees, and feels the agency should not come under FOI scrutiny. It is difficult to see how Nama can, or should, be exempted from such public scrutiny.
Nama is the largest operator in the Irish property market. It plays a major role in the domestic economy, and is set to become a property developer. Recently, it announced plans to invest €2 billion over four years, with the potential to generate 25,000 jobs in the construction sector. Given its size and growing financial significance, it is hard to sustain the case for excluding such a large State agency; in particular one that operates in what many regard as conditions of excessive secrecy. Given the scale of the country’s economic difficulties then, as Ms O’Reilly noted, the least the citizen can expect is to be “kept well and fully briefed on everything that affects our lives”. Of which Nama has become an increasingly large part.