WHEN the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act (FOISA) was passed in 2002 it was regarded as one of the world's stronger laws on access to information.
Ten years on, it must be a matter of concern that the report by the outgoing Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion amounts to a warning Scotland is in danger of falling behind other countries. Despite public awareness of FOI rights being at an all-time high, there is substantial evidence of authorities failing to deal with requests properly, in time or even to respond at all.
Many public bodies have recognised the advantage in adopting a culture of openness. Nevertheless, there is particular concern that changes in the way services are delivered have resulted in a range of new publicly funded bodies, unforeseen at the time of the original legislation, which are outwith its remit. They include prisons run by private companies, housing associations and the increasing number of arm's-length organisations set up by councils to provide services from care for the elderly to sports centres and museums.
Ministers have the power to designate such bodies under the FOI legislation and their failure to do so amounts to an undermining of the act. In his final submission today, Mr Dunion calls on ministers to use their powers to designate such bodies. As the commissioner points out, this would not extend but safeguard the public's previous right to know. For example, former council tenants whose houses were transferred to housing associations have lost their right to information from their landlord.
With amending legislation going through Holyrood, the opportunity should be seized to maintain the original intention of the act. The Bill does include another of the commissioner's proposals, an extension to the period of time within which a prosecution can be brought in cases where information has been destroyed or altered to prevent disclosure.
At a time when appeals against authorities are rising sharply, this would reinforce the gravity of failing to comply with FOI requests.This, together with Mr Dunion's suggestion that the Commissioner should have the power to take evidence about information, under oath if necessary, would be an important move towards a culture of greater transparency.
The cost of providing information cannot be lightly dismissed at a time of severe budget cuts but the need for accountability increases as services are reduced. The public benefit of FOI is clear: it has revealed vital information ranging from hospital-acquired infections to school closure decisions and the costs of building Edinburgh Royal Infirmary.
As Scotland's first Information Commissioner, Mr Dunion has done a great deal to increase the culture of transparency. His final overview, however, is a timely reminder that FOI is a fragile concept that must be carefully protected against vested interests that would prefer not to have their costs, decisions or results open to scrutiny.
Public knowledge is a highly effective weapon against ineptitude and corruption in public bodies.
