The Freedom of Data Act 2000 was enacted simply over 25 years in the past, and has now been totally in drive for 20 years. Ben Worthy makes use of Unit analysis to contradict assertions that the Act was a mistake in precept or is solely a software for journalists, and descriptions 5 methods by which it has modified issues for the higher.
The Freedom of Data (FOI) Act 2000 got here totally into drive simply over 20 years in the past. It permits the general public, as a authorized proper, to ask for data from public our bodies. It was a reform promised in each Labour manifesto since 1974, and lengthy resisted by a succession of politicians and officers. Tony Blair picked it up and championed it within the Nineties. Then, after some slightly critical backstage wrangling and rising jitters, the legislation limped onto the statute guide in 2000, coming totally into drive on 1 January 2005.
Checked out from 2025, FOI seems to be thriving. It covers 100,000 public our bodies from central and native authorities, in addition to the police and the NHS. The legislation is getting used, and that use is rising. Requests to central authorities started at 25,000 a 12 months in 2005, and as of 2023 stood at a report 70,475. Our work at native authorities stage discovered that for each request that goes to Whitehall, round three or 4 go to native authorities. However there are worries FOI is slowing down and being starved of assets. Beneath the bonnet, what is actually taking place?
Between 2005 and 2012, the Structure Unit carried out numerous research of FOI, wanting on the affect on central authorities, native authorities, in addition to on the UK Parliament and universities. It carried out a collection of surveys monitoring the progress of FOI in native authorities between 2005 and 2011, in addition to a deep dive into the consequences of the legislation at senior ranges.
Listed here are 5 issues we find out about FOI:
1. FOI is native
All politics is native and, apparently, most FOI requests are too. Though central authorities requests hog the headlines, we discovered that round 80%, or 4 in each 5 requests, go to native authorities. Our work confirmed that, as one Data Commissioner mentioned, ‘the actual worth of FOI is within the pages of native newspapers’. Only a look on the native press reveals what FOI can do, from exposing the (very giant) variety of potholes in Fife, to mapping the 180 public libraries closed since 2016.
Any try to grasp FOI must understand that most requests are for ‘micro-political’ points, and the advantages are sometimes hidden. FOI is actually about holes in roads and refuse assortment, not who invaded which nation and why. The concern is that deep austerity could also be inflicting slowdowns and delays.
2. The media are important to FOI
FOI wants the press for 2 causes. First, as a result of journalists are key customers who push on the boundaries and struggle battles for entry. Within the UK, the press helped cease a number of makes an attempt to weaken it. Second, maybe much more importantly, the media are the primary path to most individuals listening to about it – as these 103 examples from 2015 show. Â
However there are considerations. One is that FOI requests from journalists could be topic to particular remedy, as occurred in Scotland and with Occasions journalist George Greenwood, who (paradoxically) then discovered what officers have been saying about him. One other broader fear is that journalism itself is weakening, particularly domestically, and the UK’s ever increasing information deserts imply {that a} key consumer group is disappearing in entrance of our eyes.
3. FOI is widespread and utilized by the general public
Regardless of Tony Blair’s declare that FOI is especially utilized by journalists, the Unit’s analysis discovered that the general public are the biggest group of FOI customers.
(The information above is from a 2015 Unit article)
I used to say that FOI requesters have been like individuals who complain in eating places: just a few individuals do it, you don’t essentially need to be certainly one of them, however those that complain make issues higher for everybody. I used to be mistaken. Remarkably, FOI use appears to be infectious, as this ballot reveals, and a couple of in 10 individuals have now made an FOI request.
FOI is widespread too, within the sense that it has sturdy public assist. This ballot in Scotland, the place there’s a separate Scottish FOI legislation, discovered that 97% supported the concept of accessing data and 83% agreed that FOI helps to forestall ‘dangerous follow in public our bodies’. In truth, 89% wished the legislation prolonged to cowl personal contractors.
4. FOI makes politicians extra accountable
The excellent news is that FOI does make politicians have to elucidate and justify what they do. It applies an accountability strain, whether or not over why there’s a rise in house education, why organising knowledge centres appears to at all times get planning permission or the rise of self-harm in immigration detention centres. Â
It’s due to FOI, and a authorized battle by professional Martin Rosenbaum, the references (referred to as ‘citations’) for potential appointees to the Home of Lords are actually accessible for us to see (and query). As a result of FOI, Personal Eye has produced a map that permits you to see which native councillors have been late with their council tax.
5. Politicians don’t prefer it (however officers don’t thoughts)
Politicians don’t like FOI. This isn’t new, and not likely information. In 1966, US President Lyndon Johnson famously refused to be photographed signing the US FOI legislation, then wrote a notice successfully undermining it.
Within the UK FOI was publicly supported and privately disliked. Tony Blair breached this taboo in 2010 with a two-page rant in his memoirs about how he ought to by no means have finished it, somebody ought to have stopped him, and that it was being abused by journalists. David Cameron adopted by claiming it was ‘furring up the arteries of presidency’. Liz Truss additionally got here out in opposition to it, claiming the legislation was making conferences unattainable.
This may all be dismissed as noise, however the fear is that it offers the inexperienced mild to others to make use of personal emails, delete WhatsApps and texts and bask in different skullduggery to keep away from FOI legal guidelines. It sends out a sign that FOI isn’t vital. It’s no surprise that central authorities is plagued with delays and decreasing ranges of openness. Because the UK Data Commissioner has warned, ‘data delayed is data denied’.
Curiously, Unit research discovered that FOI isn’t opposed by officers. There isn’t any mass try to keep away from information, and FOI may very well have made recording higher. Neither is it significantly costly, as some declare.
Conclusion: FOI isn’t alone.
FOI was handed within the early days of the web, and now exists in a really totally different world, the place it’s half of a complete vary of openness instruments. There may be MySociety’s WhatDoTheyKnow, a platform to make public requests, which, at time of writing, had an archive of 1,143,555 requests. FOI has powered some attention-grabbing improvements, akin to a bot that tweeted each time somebody with a parliament IP handle made a change to Wikipedia. It matches neatly with a lobbying knowledge platform from Transparency Worldwide UK, the place on the push of a button customers could make an FOI request to seek out out when – and the way typically – ministers have met with a selected lobbyist.
As FOI approaches 1 / 4 of a century, we will comfortably say it has been a hit. It actually shouldn’t be certainly one of Tony Blair’s two best regrets as Prime Minister, as he claimed (banning fox searching was the opposite). FOI isn’t good, however it’s used, it broadly works, and it has finished no less than a few of what it ought to. However this isn’t a purpose to relaxation simple, and there are indicators that assets, resistance and a splash of skulduggery can critically weaken the advantages it brings.
The Unit has an in depth archive of labor on FOI, which incorporates work on the affect of FOI on parliament, Whitehall, and native authorities, its impact on universities, and the way authorities coverage is formulated within the context of FOI.
In regards to the creator
Dr Ben Worthy is a Reader in Politics and Public Coverage at Birkbeck Faculty. He labored on the Structure Unit as a Analysis Affiliate on FOI till 2012.
Additional Studying
Worthy, Ben and Hazell, Robert, Disruptive, Dynamic and Democratic? Ten Years of Freedom of Data within the UK (December 28, 2015).
Worthy, Ben; Amos, Jim; Hazell, Robert and Bourke, Gabrielle (2011) City corridor transparency? the affect of the Freedom of Data Act 2000 on native authorities in England. London, UK: The Structure Unit.
