After senior civil servants recommended changes in the Freedom of Information Act, The Irish Times put in a request under the existing legislation to learn more about the background to their final decisions.
The bundle of files from the Department of Finance arrived the other day. Besides learning that top officials like to share breakfast over early-morning meetings in the Department of the Taoiseach, one was left little the wiser.
The FOI application is probably one of the last to be dealt with under the 1998 Act; legislation that will soon be gutted beyond recognition, following the passage at Second Stage of the FOI Amendment Bill in the Dáil this week. Given the damage about to be inflicted by Charlie McCreevy, a future FOI request is not even likely to produce details about the breakfasting habits of the country's mandarins, let alone something important.
So far the Government has failed to put forward a single case where the use of the Act over the last five years has materially affected its ability to make decisions. It never even bothered to try.
Speaking in the Seanad, Mr McCreevy, in fact, said the opposite: "As a result of the Act, the quality of public debate in Ireland has improved beyond all recognition. Debates on issues are much more informed than they used to be.
"There is now better coverage of public policy and its impact on our society and our economy," he went on, before claiming that there is still some great threat to the quality of Irish public administration contained within the FOI.
Fianna Fáil, in particular, has been gunning to destroy the Act for some time, although its ambitions were curtailed during the last Dáil when they were dependent on unreliable backbenchers.
The last general election took place on May 17th last. The 29th Dáil was summoned to meet for the first time at 10.30 a.m. on June 6th, 2002. The attack on the FOI began just 11 days later.
For the Progressive Democrats, Mary Harney, Michael McDowell and Tom Parlon seem keen. Others are a bit more dubious, but their political self-interest won out after a short grapple with their consciences.
Clearly, the Government is wagering that the public just does not give a damn about freedom of information; that it bothers only journalists, non-government organisations and the like. Sadly, it looks as though they are right.
Despite less-than-truthful declarations by the Minister and the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, to the contrary, the public's right to information about their past relationships with State bodies will be sharply affected.
During his appearance before the Oireachtas Finance and Public Service Committee, the campaigner against child abuse, Mr Colm O'Gorman, warned that victims would run into bureaucratic brick walls if the Act was changed. Now Mr McCreevy says he will ensure that the public will have the right to correct inaccurate, misleading or incomplete information and to force public bodies to explain the reasons for their decisions.
Big deal. Under his changes, all applicants will have to pay upfront fees before a finger is lifted to deal with their request. "I believe such fees are long overdue. There is a very significant administrative cost to FOI," he pontificated.
Requests, he said, are estimated to cost Finance €425 each. However, the Government, which can put a price on almost everything else, has failed to come up with an overall figure. Unlike most other transactions, journalists and others already face fees without knowing what they will be charged. Higher charges will discourage future use. But that, of course, is the very intention of the changes.
Given his mention of €425, it is clear that Mr McCreevy wants the upfront fee to be as high as he can get away with, since he has, no doubt, noted approvingly the Australian experience.
In 1999 the government there introduced a $300 fee for those seeking an external review of their application's refusal. Use dropped to just 10 per cent of the year before.
Certainly FOI has a cost, Minister. Most good things in life do. But to hear a lecture on cost from people who spend €10 million on a public relations system that laughably measures itself against The West Wing and is contemptuous of the public is little less than nauseating.
However, one can pray that not all may yet be lost. In its amending legislation, the Minister has defined "government" in such a way as to include the Cabinet, Ministers of State, Cabinet sub-committees and committees of officials.
Such a definition, according to the outgoing Information Commissioner and Ombudsman, Mr Kevin Murphy, "is far reaching and constitutionally unrecognisable".
Bunreacht Na hÉireann is quite clear. It reads: "The Government shall consist of not less than seven and not more than 15 members who shall be appointed by the President in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution."
Perhaps we can pray that the President, Mrs McAleese, will refer the Bill to the Supreme Court. If the Government refuses to serve in the public interest, then Áras an Uachtaráin and the courts should.
And there is little point depending on Mr Murphy's successor, Ms Emily O'Reilly, to fight the good fight. Regardless of her many talents, she will have to work the law as it is.
Despite frequent silly misuses by some journalists and some individuals, the legislation, for all its many flaws, has been one of the keys that has done much to open up Irish society and to force the powerful to account.
Now it is being destroyed by an administration that oozes arrogance, contempt and sanctimonious claptrap; that believes it will be in power indefinitely, given that Fine Gael is in such a shambles.