§ Lord Lucasasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, when under the Freedom of Information Bill a public authority replies to an applicant on a matter where the duty to confirm or deny does not arise, they anticipate that the public authority will in every case state that the duty to confirm or deny does not arise (whether or not there is any undisclosed information); and, if so, what form of words they expect to be used. [HL2060]
§ Lord BachUnder Clause 15 of the Bill, a public authority which is relying on a claim that the duty to confirm or deny does not arise must give the applicant 129WA a notice that states that fact, specify the exemption in question and state why the exemption applies.
We do not anticipate prescribing a standard form of words that authorities should use in those circumstances—it must be a matter for each individual authority.
§ Lord Lucasasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, under the Freedom of Information Bill, a person who receives information from a public authority under the terms of the Bill may freely publish that information on the Internet; and, if not, why not, and what restrictions apply. [HL2058]
§ Lord BachWhether disclosed information may be published on the Internet or not depends on whether the information is subject to copyright under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Anyone wishing to publish disclosed information which is copyright must first seek and obtain the permission of the copyright holder. The provisions in the Freedom of Information Bill will not disturb this.
In terms of copyright, the information that may be disclosed under the proposed freedom of information regime will fall into three categories.
Some information held by public authorities will be Crown copyright. This is defined as those works made by Her Majesty or by an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his duties. The Government's White Paper on The Future Management of Crown Copyright, published on 26 March 1999, stated that:
"the future management of Crown copyright will emphasise improved and streamlined access to ensure that government information is used and developed to best advantage";
and that,
"the general principles which govern the operation of Crown copyright should be extended, where possible, to non-Crown governmental bodies and to local government".
Some information held by public authorities may be subject to the copyright of a third party. For example, government departments and agencies commission a wide range of works by non-Crown individuals and organisations. Unless specific provision is made in the commissioning contract for the copyright in such commissioned works to be assigned or transferred to the Crown, the copyright will continue to rest with the Author.
Finally, there will be information which is not subject to copyright. There would be no restriction on the copying of such information which could also be put on the Internet.
§ Lord Lucasasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, under Clause 19 of the Freedom of Information Bill, information is "reasonably accessible to the applicant" if it is not available in electronic form and the applicant requires information in that form. [HL2061]
130WA
§ Lord BachClause 19 of the Freedom of Information Bill exempts information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant by other means. When assessing whether the information is "reasonably accessible" to the applicant, the Information Commissioner will of course take into account the form in which it is available.
Where information is judged to be reasonably accessible by other means, the applicant will not have a right to require the information to be communicated to him in a different form other than the form in which it is already available. Therefore, if the information is reasonably accessible to the applicant in manual form, the applicant will not have the right to require it to be communicated to him electronically. However, an authority may always convert the information into the form requested by the applicant at its discretion.
If the information is not reasonably accessible to the applicant, then Clause 19 will not apply, in which case the applicant is entitled to express a preference for the form in which the information is to be communicated to him, and, under Clause 10 of the Bill, the authority shall so far as is practicable give effect to that preference.