» SubscribeMain section
-
Top story
Welcome for select committee's rejection of FOI charges and restrictions on release of policy discussions
FOI news release
DATELINE: 27/7/12
A major review of the Freedom of Information Act which rejects charging for FOI requests or new restrictions on access to policy discussions in Whitehall has been warmly welcomed by the Campaign for Freedom of Information which said the report "would preserve and strengthen the important advances made by the FOI Act".
Charging
Some public authorities had pressed for the right to charge for each FOI request as a way of reducing the volume of requests and the cost of the legislation. However, the House of Commons Justice Committee, which has examined how the law works, says the benefits of FOI outweigh the costs, and points to the Act's role in exposing and deterring wasteful spending.[1] It considered whether charges could be made for requests by commercial bodies and the media but concluded that such bodies could easily circumvent these by making requests in other peoples' names. It suggests authorities could reduce the costs of FOI by handling requests more efficiently.
The Campaign's director Maurice Frankel welcomed the rejection of charging, saying "large and well funded organisations might not be affected by charges but small charities and less well off requesters would ration their use of the Act or stop making requests altogether, even when they needed the information to protect their rights or argue an important case." Those who could not afford to pay might have to ask for information without invoking the Act, and have no way of challenging the deliberate withholding of inconvenient information, the Campaign added.
Policy formulation
Information about policy formulation is potentially disclosable under the Act's public interest test, though the Tribunal has held that releasing such information before decisions are taken will rarely be in the public interest. But disclosure is more likely once the decision has been taken, particularly if the information itself is not sensitive, or the decision was taken some time ago or there is a significant public interest in knowing how or why it was made.
However, the former Cabinet Secretary Lord O'Donnell and the former Home Secretary Jack Straw had argued that the possibility of disclosure made ministers and officials less likely to put their views in writing, undermining good government. Both had called for this information to be protected from disclosure regardless of the public interest in disclosure, for at least 20 years.
The committee rejected this suggestion, finding that the evidence that FOI was responsible for a "chilling effect" was too uncertain to justify such restrictions. The Campaign welcomed this decision. Mr Frankel said: "We should not allow the clock to be turned back to keep this material secret for decades, protecting those who make poor decisions or force through laws which they know won't achieve their aims".
The committee points out that ministers can veto any decision requiring them to disclose information on public interest grounds and says this is a more appropriate mechanism for protecting highly sensitive policy material than a new exemption. However, the Campaign said it would be extremely concerned if the veto - which has so far been used only 4 times in six years - were to be regularly used in future.
Private contractors
The committee says the right to information must not be undermined by the use of private sector contractors to provide public services, and calls for clear and enforceable disclosure requirements to be inserted in such contracts. But the Campaign called for a more systematic approach: "We don't believe that relying on every authority to insert an appropriate clause into every contract one at a time is likely to be effective. The FOI Act itself should state that all such contracts are deemed to include a wide disclosure requirement, automatically bringing information about the contractor's performance and the way the contractor goes about it within the Act's scope".
Time limits
The Campaign welcomed the committee's recommendation that the time limits for responding to FOI requests, and carrying out internal reviews, should be tightened to stop authorities kicking requests into the long grass. At present authorities can take an unspecified "reasonable" extension to the normal 20 working day time limit to consider the release of information on public interest grounds. The committee says this open-ended period should be limited by law to a further 20 working days. The committee also calls for a 20 working day limit for the internal reviews.[2] It also proposes that all authorities be required to publish their timeliness statistics.
The committee also recommends the removal of the 6 month time limit on prosecuting authorities which deliberately shred requested records and for greater penalties to be available - an extremely welcome recommendation, the Campaign says.
Refusing requests on cost grounds
The committee considered whether the rules which permit authorities to refuse requests on cost grounds should be changed.[3] At present authorities can take account of the time they spend finding and extracting the requested information. Some authorities want to also be able to count the time they spend deciding whether to release it. The committee rejects this idea, agreeing with the Campaign's argument that it would be open to abuse.
The committee does, however, recommend that authorities should be able to refuse requests on cost grounds if they would take more than 16 hours to answer, a reduction from the current 18 hour limit. The Campaign said this was a relatively modest change, but expressed concern that the government might use the recommendation to implement wider changes than the committee had proposed to the way in which these rules operated. Its says the Blair administration attempted to amend these rules in 2006 in ways that would have fundamentally undermined the Act's operation.
Drawing attention to the costs of disclosure
The committee says suggests that disclosure logs (lists of released documents published online by authorities) should include the name of the requester, presumably as a way of drawing attention to requesters who make excessive use of the Act. The Campaign has no objection to this proposal, but says it should not apply where genuine privacy concerns arise (eg where a requester seeks information about a death of a relative).
Research interests
The committee recommends a new exemption, subject to a public interest test, based on one found in the Scottish FOI Act, for information whose disclosure would prejudice an ongoing programme of research, or the interests of the researchers or research subjects.Notes
The Justice Committee's report "Post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, First Report of Session 2012–13, HC 96-I, is published on July 26 2012.
The Campaign made two written submissions and gave oral evidence to the committee. See:
www.cfoi.org.uk/pdf/foipostlegscrutiny.pdf
www.cfoi.org.uk/pdf/foipostlegscrutiny_cfoi_supplementary.pdf
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=10302
[1] For examples of FOI requests which have revealed wasteful spending see pages 14-19 of the Campaign's supplementary submission to the committee: www.cfoi.org.uk/pdf/foipostlegscrutiny_cfoi_supplementary.pdf
[2] These are carried out by authorities when a requester complains about the response to their requests.
[3] At present these allow authorities to refuse if the costs of finding and extracting the information would exceed £450 or £600 in the case of government departments, corresponding to 18 and 24 hours respectively (at a standard £25/hour rate).
Last modified: Friday, July 27, 2012
Your comments:
Andrew Peacher
01754 228 273
07827731060
andrewpeacher@talktalk.net
Wensday 12th Thursday 13th September 2012 The Suncastle Skegness
Child Stealing by the State The Truth Conference
Indy Media please share anyone pls share
Dear Parents and Professionals,
I Would like to invite you to the Annual Conference of the Child Stealing by the state conference to be held on Wensday 12/13th of September at the suncastle in skegness lincolnshire.
The conference which will start at 9am on the 12th of september which will focus on child protection and the need to keep families together and how we stop our children being removed from loving families by force.The Mayor of Skegness will open the event
We have many guest speakers including Child Protection officers we have Brian Gerrish ex navy Uk column newspaper roger hayes the british constitutional group MP John hemmings we have parents such as lucy allan and tina challonor google these names be amazed.
We also have Dr carley from the usa speaking via skype link We have parents and children speaking.We are looking for Orginizations small and large.firemen, gps, health,care, Police, Nhs, Child Protection, mps, Social workers, social services, foster carers, Solicitors, Judges
These people are needed to give a balanced view to the conference the difficulties of child protection the mistakes made the Legislation the future of child protection the focus to support families more and to keep children with natural parents.
The aims of the conference is to which aims to prevent physical, emotional and sexual abuse and neglect of children by promoting the physical, emotional, and social well-being of children. We aim to promote the rights of children as citizens, through multi-disciplinary collaboration, education, campaigning and other appropriate activities'
The Other aim is to stop stories like this one and asking those involved in child protection to think before they remove children http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnist /christopherbooker/7870342/Forced-adoption-is-a-truly-dreadful-scandal.html
1:-The fact is that parents who have committed no crime are losing their children to forced adoption!
2:-Experts who depend on court appearances for a living, nearly always agree with the local authority.They make predictions that parents just might abuse their children (including newborn babies) in the future ,so these parents lose their children to permanent fostercare or adoption,not for something they have done but for something they might (or might not) do!
3:-Over 1000 UK children /month are taken into care ,Fosterers are paid an average £400/week per child (birth mothers get around £20/week),and a foster agency founded by social workers getting around £1500/week per child was recently sold for £130million !A real money driven industry !!
4:-Parents whose children have been taken are gagged and threatened with prison if they protest publicly;At contact parents are gagged again and forbidden to get emotional,to speak any foreign language,or to discuss the case with their children otherwise contact will be stopped.
5:-More children are taken for emotional abuse than physical and sexual abuse added together.Despite "baby P" the number taken for physical abuse is steadily falling as a percentage of the total number of children taken.
6:-What are the solutions?
(a)Impose criminal rules of evidence in family courts so children cannot be taken unless parents are proved to have committed a crime affecting their children. Also parents would be free to obtain a second opinion from an expert of their own choosing.
(b)Abolish all gagging of parents leaving them free to protest openly if their children are taken, and also to say what they like to them at contact without censorship ! Two very simple changes, two very obvious solutions.,but will anyone impose them and derail the moneytrain? Don't hold your breath
This is a conference to expose and bring to trial those helping the State to steal and abuse children. We will name names, departments, authorities, organisations, judges, MPs, police, psychiatrists and more. With the help of those attending, we will expose the real evidence for:
MASSIVE STATE SPONSORED CHILD ABUSE AND TRAFFICKING AND COVER UP BY THE STATE AND ITS AGENTS
Have you experienced any of the following:
Children taken under false pretences?
Bullying by Children's Services, Cafcass, Local Authority?
False verbal and documentary evidence in Court?
Collusion behind your back by your Legal Team with the Local Authority legal team?
MPs ignoring you and your plight? Child(ren) being abused in the 'care' of Children's Services?
Mental breakdown because of the attack on your family?
Do you hold information and evidence concerning:State trafficking of children?
Falsifying of Family Court Documents?
Children disappearing into the care system?
Police deliberately blocking investigations into child abuse rings?
Misinformation by the BBC and mainstream media?
False help and support groups, charities and people?Have you attended meetings in Westminster that 'pat you on the head' and achieve nothing? - then you need to attend and be an active participant in Blowing the Whistle - Child Stealing by the State.
We need you and your evidence. We need you in numbers, because the State hides the evidence by isolating victims or controlling the support organisations to whom you turn. By making out that only a few isolated families are affected the State can control national media to hide the truth.
Please provide a 2 page summary of the basic facts of your case and indicate evidence that you hold. Here is an example to help you do this. Active participants will be asked to provide evidence for use at the conference. Real evidence is vital to stopping the unlawful abuse of families and children.
Any questions or for more information, please email:
NEVER EVER FORGET1 BABY PETER
2 VICTORIA CLIMBIE
3 HOLLIE GREIG SEX ABUSE SCANDAL
4 YOUR STOLEN CHILD MEET PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE SAME SOCIAL SERVICES ISSUES
5 YOUR CHILD WILL BE NEXT
Posted by: andy peacher: 29 Jul, 2012 14:24:25
» Click here to add your comment.
Comments will be subject to approval and should not be defamatory, obscene, racist, in breach of copyright, or contrary to law. The CPBF is not reponsible for any views expressed here.
Previous free speech & censorship stories
Call for register of all lobbyists
MP who took on Rupert Murdoch launches campaign to safeguard Freedom of Information Act
Briefing on the future of the Freedom of Information Act (Note new venue)
DEFAMATION BILL 2011: Consultation by the Joint Parliamentary Committee
Mosley sues Google over sex video access
Welcome for greater online disclosure - but concern that contracting out will encourage secrecy
WikiLeaks: US opens grand jury hearing
Julian Assange to be extradited to Sweden - He will appeal against the extradition ruling
Bail decision welcomed
Assange's release delayed
The arrest of Julian Assange - the work goes on
How the BBC surreptitiously censors callers to phone-ins
Net censorship finds a new expression
Welcome for decision to drop proposed cabinet papers exemption
Stars of UK comedy and science stand up against unfair libel laws
CPBF condemns temporary shutdown for WikiLeaks
Panorama nurse can return to work
Secret filming nurse up for award
Whistleblower Nurse Appeal
Breen judgment a landmark victory for press freedom
An untold story?
Hundreds demonstrate their freedom to photograph
Olympic builders forced to sign gagging orders
Brown backs down in expenses row
Access to MPs' expenses move criticised
Triumph for journalists' rights as Sally Murrer wins her case
No Place for Censorship at Olympics
Journalists facing harassment in China says Greenslade
Chinese Authorities' Broken Promises
AGM condemns threats to Media Lens
-
Notices
Events & Announcements
World Press Freedom Day
More reporters are currently imprisoned in Turkey than in any other country in the world. Only a matter of weeks ago lawyers failed to persuade a Turkish court to release a 76-year-old journalist from a Turkish internet news station.
World Press Freedom Day on Friday May 3, 2013 is being marked in Britain by a rally to highlight the dangers facing journalists in Turkey and in this podcast, Nicholas Jones speaks to Barry White, Organiser at the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom, and Sam Bamford, the TUC's policy officer for Eastern Europe and Africa about the importance of a campaign to highlight international press freedom.
The World Press Freedom Day rally is being staged by the National Union of Journalists at the NUJ head office, Gray’s Inn Road, London WC1 on Thursday May 2, 6pm-8pm.
DATELINE: 27/4/13
UK launch of EU media campaign
DATELINE: 13/3/13
The UK launch of a 'European Citizens' Initiative' calling for EU rules against concentration of media power will take place on Thursday March 21 from 11:00am – 12:30pm in Committee Room 4A at the House of Lords, London. Guest speakers will include actor and activist Hugh Grant (pictured), media consultant Claire Enders, Professor Steven Barnett, Barry McCall (President of the NUJ) and Marc Gruber (Director of the European Federation of Journalists).
A European Citizens' Initiative is an official petition, like a Downing Street petition. If it succeeds in gathering a million signatures across the EU, the Commission is obliged to respond.
This petition calls for the EU to act to protect media pluralism and press freedom.
CPBF Annual General Meeting
DATELINE: 1/3/13
Make a note in your diary
Saturday 13 July 2013 from 10.00am
NUJ HQ, 308/312 Gray's Inn Road, London WC1.
Leveson, media ownership, CPBF future work.
DOWNLOAD FREEPRESS NOW
DATELINE: 26/3/10
Download Freepress in PDF, ePub or mobi format. Issue 194 now available.
MEDIA FOR ALL CONFERENCE
DATELINE: 26/3/10
Papers from the Media for All Conference
MEDIA MANIFESTO
DATELINE: 26/3/10
The media’s job is to inform and entertain us but we rely on them too to tell us what our rulers and representatives are up to. In the run-up to the Iraq war the government used spin and disinformation in the media to create panic and mislead people. The truth is coming out now, but we need stronger, more independent media to be able to scrutinise governments and make informed choices.
-
Previous stories
Free Speech & Censorship
Call for register of all lobbyists
MP who took on Rupert Murdoch launches campaign to safeguard Freedom of Information Act
Briefing on the future of the Freedom of Information Act (Note new venue)
DEFAMATION BILL 2011: Consultation by the Joint Parliamentary Committee
Mosley sues Google over sex video access
Welcome for greater online disclosure - but concern that contracting out will encourage secrecy
WikiLeaks: US opens grand jury hearing
Julian Assange to be extradited to Sweden - He will appeal against the extradition ruling
Bail decision welcomed
Assange's release delayed
The arrest of Julian Assange - the work goes on
How the BBC surreptitiously censors callers to phone-ins
Net censorship finds a new expression
Welcome for decision to drop proposed cabinet papers exemption
Stars of UK comedy and science stand up against unfair libel laws
CPBF condemns temporary shutdown for WikiLeaks
Panorama nurse can return to work
Secret filming nurse up for award
Whistleblower Nurse Appeal
Breen judgment a landmark victory for press freedom
An untold story?
Hundreds demonstrate their freedom to photograph
Olympic builders forced to sign gagging orders
Brown backs down in expenses row
Access to MPs' expenses move criticised
Triumph for journalists' rights as Sally Murrer wins her case
No Place for Censorship at Olympics
Journalists facing harassment in China says Greenslade
Chinese Authorities' Broken Promises
AGM condemns threats to Media Lens
