Legislation like the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 1997 can sometimes seem to reflect the interests of particular groups but not of that possibly mythical entity, the average person. The Act has provided newspapers with much material, some of it quite forgettable. The legislation has also been a boon to solicitors preparing cases on behalf of clients: the Department of Education & Science has had a steady flow of Freedom of Information applications from solicitors acting on behalf of clients who went through the industrial school/reformatory/orphanage system.
The use of the FOI Act to make the reports of inspections of nursing homes available to anyone who asks for them is, however, an example of just how useful this legislation can be to the average citizen. Thanks to a decision by the Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Murphy, reported in this newspaper yesterday, anybody can write to a health board and obtain copies of the inspection reports of particular nursing homes. This opens up a new source of information, both for those seeking nursing homes for relatives and for those who suspect a relative was not well treated in a particular home.
The availability of these reports appears to have originated with a decision by officials in the North Eastern Health Board to release records to a man whose brother had died in a home. The officials decided, laudably and courageously, that the public interest demanded the release of the report. The owner of the nursing home appealed the matter to the Information Commissioner and Mr Murphy supported the health board's decision. In doing so he laid down the important principle that, "there is a significant public interest in the public knowing how public bodies carry out inspections in individual cases and that the regulatory functions assigned to them achieve the purpose of the relevant regulations".
This principle is of exceptional importance: if it is applied widely - and not just confined to nursing home inspections - its effects could be far-reaching. It will greatly increase the transparency of the way in which the State conducts its business. Mr Murphy, in his decisions on cases appealed to him, has displayed a determination to make the Act work for the public - and he has made it clear that this is what he is there to do.
Freedom of Information officers in public bodies are developing a laudable culture which favours the release of information which only a few years ago would have been jealously guarded. Sometimes a decision will smack of an attempt by senior officials to avoid providing information, but by and large, Freedom of Information officers appear to have taken the spirit of the Act to heart.
None of this would be happening had the then Minister of State, Eithne Fitzgerald, not brought the Freedom of Information Act to fruition. There are, of course, flaws in the legislation and in how it is applied. For instance, it is unusual to obtain information less than a month after making a request and it very often takes longer. The process needs to be speeded up.