Evidence submitted by Alasdair Roberts,
Professor of Public Administration
1. I am a professor of public administration
at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University in the United States.
I am a Canadian and British citizen. I have used the disclosure
laws of Canada, the United States, Australia, and European Union
for several years. My research on the operation of disclosure
laws has been widely published. I often conduct my research by
filing FOI requests for information about the internal operations
of FOI systems.
2. The UK FOI Act is, from the point of
view of my personal experience, effectively inoperative. I am
still waiting for the final resolution of seven FOI requests filed
between April 2005 and February 2006 that relate to the operation
of FOI systems. All of these requests are now the subject of complaints
to the Information Commissioner. The oldest of these requests
will mark its second birthday on Sunday, 22 April; the youngest
is now well over one year old. Several of these complaints have
not been assigned to investigators and are not, to the best of
my knowledge, the subject of an active investigation.
3. In several of these cases, departments
of central government relied on the advice of DCA and invoked
section 36 of the FOIA. In one case, for example, MoD refused
information about the handling of an FOI request on the grounds
that "Parliament provided a powerful enforcement mechanism
for applicants who are dissatisfied with the way in which their
requests have been handled and there is considerable public interest
in not engaging in a burdensome process which circumvents the
statutory enforcement process."
4. I pointed out at the time, without effect,
that this reasoning made an unwarranted and unflattering assumption
about my motives in seeking information about the FOI process.
Moreover, the assertion that Parliament has provided a "powerful
enforcement mechanism" has proved to be completely unjustified,
as the extensive delays in dealing with my complaints have proved.
5. In testimony which I submitted in February
2006, I observed that the inability of the OIC to act promptly
on complaints had the effect of encouraging delays in responding
to initial requests and conducting internal reviews. Given this
circumstance, and the lack of any incentive for central government
departments to reconsider their use of section 36, I ceased making
requests under the UK FOIA in early 2006.
6. The effect of DCA's advice, and the OIC's
performance, is to block access to information that is necessary
to make an objective appraisal of the workings of the FOI system.
Until this problem is addressed, it would seem to me to be imprudent
to contemplate serious changes to the FOI regime, such as substantial
fee increases.
7. I also have no doubt, given the past
conduct of central government departments, that modified fees
rules would be applied in an effort to block access to information
which is now denied under section 36.
8. The present situation is deeply regrettable.
Other jurisdictions routinely release information which is now
denied by central government departments on the advice of DCA.
The effect of this behavior is to undermine understanding of,
and trust in, the Freedom of Information Act.
20 April, 2007
| 
