Skip to site navigation

Select Committee confirms Constitution Unit analysis in review of Freedom of Information Act

26 July 2012

In its Post-Legislative Scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, to be published on Thursday 26 July, the Commons Justice Committee has drawn heavily on the Constitution Unit’s analysis of how well the FOI Act is working, and cited the Unit’s research and evidence over 40 times in the Committee’s report.

“The Justice Committee has conducted a very thorough review of the operation of the Act”, said Director of the Constitution Unit Prof Robert Hazell.  “They concluded, as we did, that FOI has led to greater transparency and accountability.  But it has not achieved its secondary aims of improving the quality of government decision making, or increasing public understanding of those decisions; nor has it led to an increase in public trust, or public participation in government.  In those respects FOI was over-sold.  In reaching those conclusions the Committee drew heavily on our research projects which evaluated the impact of FOI on Whitehall, and on local government”.

The Committee also drew heavily on the Constitution Unit’s research on the costs of FOI, and on whether FOI has had a chilling effect.  It decided not to recommend an application fee for FOI, and decided not to recommend a stronger exemption for policy advice, or a specific exemption for Cabinet papers.  Instead the Committee invited senior government officials to re-affirm that there is a safe space for policy discussions, and that the government is prepared to use the veto to protect that space. 

Prof Hazell commented, “That will not provide the greater certainty which officials like Sir Gus O’Donnell were calling for.  Officials  will not know until much later whether the veto might be applied.  At best they might know that the government is more willing to exercise the veto.  But that guesswork might degenerate into a cat and mouse game, with greater friction between the government and the Information Commissioner”. 

Notes for Editors

Media

Join the Debate

Blog

News

UKIP Candidates: The Anti-Westminster Outsiders?

Fri, 30 Jan 2015 10:30:14 +0000

Much of UKIP’s appeal has arisen from positioning itself as the ‘anti-Westminster party’ but to what extent do UKIP candidates differ from those put forward by the ‘traditional parties’? Sally Symington and Jennifer Hudson assess the backgrounds of UKIP candidates using the data available and suggest that they may in fact reinforce the ‘male, pale and stale’ image of […]

Read more...

The Counter Terrorism and Security Bill: a potential further erosion of citizenship rights in the United Kingdom

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:00:18 +0000

Hayley J. Hooper assesses the notion of ‘temporary exclusion orders’ proposed in new anti-terrorism legislation. She highlights the orders can be made without judicial oversight and argues that passing the Bill risks giving parliamentary legitimacy to a policy adverse to human rights. The Counter Terrorism and Security Bill was introduced into the House of Commons […]

Read more...

If the debates do not go ahead, it will be the fault of self-interest on the part of the main parties and the broadcasters

Fri, 16 Jan 2015 10:00:00 +0000

Whether there will be debates this year in advance of the 2015 General Election is open to question, with partisan and corporate self-interest threatening to overwhelm the process by which inclusion in the debate is governed. Nicholas Allen argues that this brinksmanship threatens the debates taking place not only in a satisfactory manner, but going ahead […]

Read more...
Mailing List

Connect with us

RSSFlickr

Footer menu