There is still time for the Government to change the terms of its pernicious Freedom of Information Bill.
A decision by the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, last week, to withdraw a section of the Bill that would have prevented victims of child sexual abuse from accessing relevant files and precluded aggrieved parents from recovering details of organ-retention by hospitals was a small concession. But it failed to address the broad thrust of the legislation which will withdraw from the public the right to know what is being done in its name.
Two weeks ago, following extensive hearings with interested parties, the Government-controlled Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service concluded that significant amendments to the Bill were required. And it asked for time to consider the matter further. Its representations were ignored, along with key issues raised by the outgoing Ombudsman and Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Murphy, as the Minister for Finance pushes ahead to have the legislation in place by April 21st.
This Bill is insidious in its intent and will be destructive in its application. Access to the decision-making process of ministers and public servants, which exists under current law, will be removed. The benefits of the 1997 Freedom of Information Act have been obvious for some time, not least in the exposure of official incompetence in relation to the Bertie Bowl. But Mr McCreevy was not prepared to offer a single, justifying case of damage caused to good governance by existing legislation, when he rammed the Committee Stage of his Bill through the Dáil.
The Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, and Mr McCreevy have sought political cover through a review of the Act conducted by the Secretaries General of five Departments. But the provisions of this Bill go far beyond the changes suggested by them. The legislation is nothing less than an assault on the concept of open government. It draws a veil over all communications between ministers, along with background information on Dáil questions. It expands the definition of "government"; protects the deliberations of advisory committees; allows Secretaries General to decide what information shall be released; and limits the authority of the Ombudsman and Information Commissioner.
It would be wrong to regard this as a contest between the media and the Government. The freedom of expression enshrined in the Constitution is an individual right and the media are only the vehicle through which that right is exercised. Ordinary citizens have a right - even a duty - to keep themselves informed of what is being done in their name. This Bill will facilitate greater official secrecy and limit the investigative power of parliament vis-à-vis the executive. It is a bad day's work. If the Coalition Government persists in its determination to limit freedom of information and to expand the definition of "government", the President, Mrs McAleese, should refer the Bill to the Supreme Court to test its constitutionality.