The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Burden,
Richard
(Birmingham, Northfield)
(Lab)
Grogan,
Mr. John
(Selby)
(Lab)
Gwynne,
Andrew
(Denton and Reddish)
(Lab)
Hain,
Mr. Peter
(Neath)
(Lab)
Heald,
Mr. Oliver
(North-East Hertfordshire)
(Con)
Hemming,
John
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(LD)
Hesford,
Stephen
(Wirral, West)
(Lab)
Howarth,
David
(Cambridge)
(LD)
Howell,
John
(Henley) (Con)
Laing,
Mrs. Eleanor
(Epping Forest)
(Con)
Lucas,
Ian
(Wrexham) (Lab)
McGuire,
Mrs. Anne
(Stirling)
(Lab)
Salter,
Martin
(Reading, West)
(Lab)
Timpson,
Mr. Edward
(Crewe and Nantwich)
(Con)
Wills,
Mr. Michael
(Minister of State, Ministry of
Justice)
Wright,
Jeremy
(Rugby and Kenilworth)
(Con)
Chris Stanton, Committee
Clerk
attended the
Committee
Second
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Monday 27
April
2009
[David
Taylor in the
Chair]
Draft
Freedom of Information (Time for Compliance with
Request) Regulations
2009
4.30
pm
The
Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Mr. Michael
Wills): I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Freedom of Information (Time for
Compliance with Request) Regulations
2009.
Welcome
to the Committee, Mr. Taylor. I am sure that under your
chairmanship, the regulations will be dealt with expeditiously and
wisely.
The purpose
of the draft regulations is to allow more time for certain schools and
pupil referral units in Northern Ireland to respond to freedom of
information requests to take account of closure during school holidays.
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 enshrined in law for the first time
the right of access to official information. The Act applies to more
than 100,000 public authorities, and since it came fully into force on
1 January 2005, central Government-monitored bodies have received more
than 30,000 requests a year. Requests to public authorities in the
wider public sector exceed 87,000 a
year.
Under
the 2000 Act, freedom of information requests must be responded to
promptly, normally within 20 working days. It
is right that people making requests should receive a timely response,
hence that provision. Some 82 per cent. of requests received by central
Government-monitored bodies during January 2005 and December 2008 were
answered within 20 days. However, there are limited occasions when such
a deadline is impractical. That is why in 2004, in the run-up to the
introduction of the Act, regulations were laid to extend the deadline
for answering requests for specific public authorities in certain
limited circumstances.
Those 2004
regulations extended the usual limit of 20 working days in
relation to maintained schools in England and Wales and schools
maintained by the Secretary of State for Defence, to take account of
closure during school holidays. The limit was also extended to enable
archives to deal with requests for information that were contained in a
public record that was being transferred to a closed file because one
of the freedom of information exemptions applied, and to allow time for
information to be obtained from front-line units of the armed forces
when they cannot be reached for operational reasons. The extension also
covers requests involving information that is held outside the UK and
takes time to
retrieve.
The
draft regulations will give certain Northern Ireland schools and units
the same reasonable allowance that schools in England and Wales already
have under the 2004 regulations. Currently, controlled
schools, voluntary schools,
grant-maintained integrated schools and pupil referral
units in Northern Ireland can face difficulties
in answering requests received during holiday periods when the schools
are closed and unstaffed. That is a particular problem during the
summer holidays, which can be about eight weeks long and therefore
longer than the 20 working days permitted for a response. Schools and
units in Northern Ireland may therefore be put in a position in which,
unavoidably, they will be unable to comply with the time limits
provided for under the Act, and that is not
sensible.
Section 10 of
the Act requires public authorities to deal with FOI requests promptly,
and in any event within 20 working days. If the draft regulations are
made, managers of certain Northern Ireland schools and pupil referral
units would not have to count any day that is not a school day, such as
during the school holidays, towards the period of 20 working days
within which requests must be answered. However, requests must be
answered within a maximum of 60 working days in total, including any
school holiday periods. Schools will still have an obligation to
respond to requests promptly. When it is possible for a school to
respond to a request earlier, the response cannot be delayed until the
end of the extended time limit.
The draft
regulations will ensure that certain schools and units in Northern
Ireland will have more time to deal with information requests when they
need it most. It will also place schools in Northern Ireland on a
comparable footing with their counterparts in England and Wales. I
commend the draft regulations to the Committee, and I hope that hon.
Members will agree that this necessary, common-sense measure should
proceed.
4.35
pm
Mrs.
Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest) (Con): It is a pleasure,
Mr. Taylor, to serve under your chairmanship of what I
suspect will be a fairly brief sitting.
It is good to
have straightforward regulations before us, and I do not oppose them
because they are perfectly reasonable. It is right that when the
practicalities of a situation show that those who are required by law
to undertake certain duties cannot reasonably do so, the law should be
changed to take account of that. The Government are sensibly doing that
this
afternoon.
Does
the Minister have any plans to change the freedom of information
legislation in other ways? The most recent quarterly statistics show
that, of nearly 5,000 requests to central Government, nearly 800 did
not receive a response within 20 working days, and the deadline was
extended for just over 300 on public interest grounds, which is of
course allowed. This is a narrow debate, and I will not allow my
remarks to stray further, Mr. Taylor, but the Minister has
introduced the regulations because several bodies could not comply with
the law as drafted. Have the Government considered how their
Departments work? It is not reasonable that 800 freedom of information
requests to Departments, which are well geared up to deal with such
matters, should not have been dealt with within 20 days. I must not
stray further, but I am sure that the Minister will want the Committee
to be aware of the facts. Having made that point, I am pleased not to
oppose the
order.
4.37
pm
John
Hemming (Birmingham, Yardley) (LD): I, too, am pleased to
serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Taylor. I am sure that
our discussion will not take long, because the order is entirely
reasonable.
It is odd how
the edges of freedom of information have variations, such as the
difficulty of getting people to respond within 20 days, but then
finding that people such as the Official Solicitor are not covered by
that requirement. However, the draft regulations are entirely
reasonable because freedom of information must be practical. We
therefore support
them.
4.38
pm
Mr.
Wills: I am grateful for the Committees support,
which seems to be unanimous. To reply to the hon.
Ladys questions, we constantly scrutinise central
Governments performance. Eighty-two per cent. of requests
received a response within the time limit, but we must not be
complacent. We constantly consider
how to improve our performance and the Ministry of Justice works hard to
do so, but the hon. Lady is quite right to ask for further
improvements. We agree that improvement is needed, and it will be
achieved.
The hon. Lady
asked what other plans we have. She will be aware that we have
consulted under section 5 of the 2000 Act, which covers
designationthis may address the hon. Gentlemans
pointon extending the legislations scope. We expect to
be able to report the results of that consultation to the House
shortly.
Question
put and agreed
to.
4.38
pm
Committee
rose.