§ 11. Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire)What recent representations he has received on the Government's proposals for freedom of information. [95000]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Mike O'Brien)The consultation document on freedom of information, published on 24 May 1999, invited comments on the draft legislation. We received a total of 2,248 submissions—all but 400 of which were part of an organised petition on scientific experimentation on animals. None the less, copies of the submissions have been placed in the Library. On 22 October, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced the changes that we propose to make to the draft Bill after the consultation period. We shall introduce a Freedom of Information Bill as soon as the legislative timetable allows.
§ Mr. KirkwoodWhy does the proposed Bill still allow for facts on which policy decisions have been based to remain secret, given, first, that the United Kingdom code of conduct, which the Bill seeks to replace, allows disclosure; secondly, that the Republic of Ireland, in 1997, introduced its own freedom of information legislation allowing disclosure; and, thirdly, and perhaps most extraordinarily of all, that the Home Secretary himself—on 21 July, when he appeared before the Select Committee on Public Administration—said that, on balance, he thought that it was probably right that background and factual information should be made available? Is it not wholly inadequate that we should merely rely on encouraging authorities to use their discretion to make such essential information available?
§ Mr. O'BrienMuch factual information is already available. The Government have considered with great care the various submissions that have been made, and have introduced a draft Bill that we believe strikes the right balance. Although it is correct to say that, in the past, Governments have been too secretive, the Bill will open up government.
Nevertheless, freedom of information cannot be absolute—there is a tension between balancing interests, such as the individual's right to privacy and the confidentiality of some commercial information that is given to Government. The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that up to 60 per cent. of requests for information under United States freedom of information legislation are made by companies seeking to elicit confidential information held by the Government about other companies.
We also have to ensure the good and effective administration of Government, which entails that discussions are held properly within Government. In many cases, however, the background factual information may already be in the public arena or—because of the legislation and the culture of openness that we seek to introduce—may be placed in the public arena by Ministers.
§ Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich)Is my hon. Friend aware that there has been a jealous clinging to secrecy by every Government this century, and that it is essential that this Government should prove themselves 17 conclusively different? Will he, please, remember that the Home Secretary has an endearing personal habit of telling the truth, frequently to his own disadvantage, and that that might be an example that it would be very useful for the rest of the Government to follow?
§ Mr. O'BrienAs my hon. Friend says, my right hon. Friend has a record for being open with the House and bringing forward legislation that makes substantial changes. Nothing in the Bill will prevent the disclosure of any information. We must be clear about that. Exemptions do not necessarily prevent the publication of information. Ministers can decide to publish material covered by an exemption if appropriate. We intend to create a new culture of openness in government. The Bill must be seen in the context of the new statutory right of access to information, the new requirement to consider exercising discretion, new publication schemes and a new information commissioner, who will have strong powers to elicit information from the Government and from other public authorities.
§ Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)Despite the 21 exemptions in the Bill, does the Minister agree that its purpose is to ensure openness and clarity in government? Does he agree that episodes such as that which happened this morning, when the Home Secretary told a BBC reporter in Birmingham that the chief constable of Staffordshire had his figures wrong, demonstrate that there is no clarity in government? Does not backing the police force mean backing chief constables and not calling them liars?
§ Mr. O'BrienStaffordshire had the biggest increase of any constabulary between 1995 and 1998. The hon. Gentleman must be sure of his ground when he starts talking about freedom of information, because when he stood for election, the Tory campaign guide—my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has quoted from it before, but it is worth hearing again—said that the party's view on freedom of information legislation was:
The only group in Britain who are seriously interested in a freedom of information Act are inquisitive left-wing busy bodies.I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman includes himself in that category.
§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)As an inquisitive left-wing busybody, may I ask how Home Office Ministers fancy the idea of their Bill being contrasted with a Bill, which would be the dream of Mr. Maurice Frankel, put forward by the Edinburgh Parliament? Would that create problems?
§ Mr. O'BrienWe will ensure that the Bill that comes before this House deals with matters for Britain as a whole. We want to ensure a change in the legislation and a new code of practice to make it effective, as well as a change of culture in government. We have a manifesto commitment to introduce effective freedom of information legislation. We shall have to wait and see what proposals come forward in Scotland. The Scottish 18 Parliament may decide to do things differently; that is the prerogative of devolution. Our freedom of information legislation will substantially change the way in which the Government operate. For 18 years, the previous Government did nothing. We shall deliver freedom of information legislation.