It's a long road to the government going public
IT WAS June 2008 when the Policy Council decided to investigate freedom of information regimes as one way for the States to become more open. Two-and-a-half years later, nothing much has happened - but that could all be about to change.
IT WAS June 2008 when the Policy Council decided to investigate freedom of information regimes as one way for the States to become more open. Two-and-a-half years later, nothing much has happened - but that could all be about to change. Ministers are under a direction to report back on the issue by the end of the year and the first faltering steps have been taken. Last week, senior civil servants and politicians were briefed on freedom of information by an official from the Ministry of Justice, which is responsible for the act introduced in the UK in 2005. In the background there is also the Scrutiny Committee's investigation into public engagement. And later this month, the States will debate a report on good governance by the Public Accounts Committee which encourages departments to be proactive rather than reactive and 'to ensure that as much appropriate information as possible is placed in the public domain'. It is all aimed at improving trust in government. So it has taken a long time to even start the baby steps and a large question remains about how committed the States will be to 'the people's right to know'. There is already a well-rehearsed argument trotted out every now and then - what is it we are not telling you? Well, you can look to see what is happening overseas for some examples. The UK coalition government has committed to publishing the salaries of top-earning civil servants and full online disclosures of all central government contracts and spending over £25,000, for starters. 'The government believes that we need to throw open the doors of public bodies to enable the public to hold politicians and public bodies to account. 'We also recognise that this will help to deliver better value for money in public spending and help us achieve our aim of cutting the record deficit,' the coalition's programme for government stated in May. If China and Zimbabwe have access regimes, why not Guernsey? And, of course, the whole MPs expenses row of floating duck islands, second homes and adult films first came to light after a long-running FoI battle. The UK and Jersey both started with a code of practice before moving to legislation to give more powers to enforce disclosure. Jersey still needs to find the money to enact the law. But a code can be a toothless animal. There was five years' preparation time in the UK to gear up for the change, which covers thousands of public authorities - and these are being expanded by the Lib-Con government. It is not just central government, but places such as schools and hospitals, and potentially, utility companies that can be subject to the FoI . Under the UK act, anyone can make a request in writing - you do not have to live in the jurisdiction. There is a right, when the information is held, to have it passed on - but there is a long list of exemptions, both absolute and qualified, and a cost limit of £600 in central government. A review in 2006 found that the average cost of a FoI request in central government was £254. If a request is turned down, reasons have to be given and the decision is open to challenge. Requests can also be refused if they are repeated, from the same applicant or part of a campaign. Vexatious requests can also be turned down. There is no fee in the UK, but other regimes charge and this could be one way of covering the costs associated with FoI. FoI will not throw the doors completely open. For example, when a policy is being formed, the information being used will not be released until after the policy is in place - this is seen as allowing thinking time, but at least it is released. People generally cannot get the minutes of Cabinet meetings - on the couple of occasions a request has been granted, it has been blocked again by ministers. The reasoning is the need for collective responsibility in the Cabinet - how this sits with consensus government is arguable. And personal information will also not be released. One of the key elements of FoI is proactive disclosure. Publishing the information in the first place will cut down on the number of requests. It also requires a change of culture. There have been some tentative moves to opening up the States in the last couple of terms, but hardly a revolution. Guernsey already has some open meetings where the media can sit in and report on proceedings - waste, the States Assembly and Constitution Committee and now some Scrutiny Committee meetings -Êand open planning meetings are on the horizon. In fact, the one section of the government website that does stand up to scrutiny is the new planning area, which is searchable and provides a wealth of information once you know how to use it. All a move in the right direction, but there is a long road ahead.
