“Transparency is not just about what the authorities choose to reveal to citizens, but what citizens have a right to ask to see.” That’s what Information Commissioner Christopher Graham said this week in a speech to mark International Right to Know Day 2011 which concentrated wholly on the present state of information rights in the UK.
“We need to ensure that there’s no gap between the right to know rhetoric and the reality of a ‘don’t tell ’em’ mentality that all-too-frequently frustrates the citizen,” stated Graham.
“I believe that an active and independent ICO can help make a practical reality of the transparency agenda, and not just in terms of supporting the direction of travel but also helping to reach a common goal. Delivering a Right to Know 2.0. The reality, not just the rhetoric. The difference between seeing it through… and seeing through it.”
In the course of his video address on YouTube, the Commissioner set out how the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is already a key player in delivering an effective Right to Know and how his responsibility for both the right to know and the right to privacy enables the ICO to assess where the public interest lies when rights appear to be in conflict.
Graham also addressed the key issue as to why the ICO should be an essential partner in delivering the much-discussed transparency agenda through to practical reality.
In addition, Graham launched a public consultation on the content of publication schemes – the documents that specify what information public authorities must release on a proactive basis.
Speaking about that consultation, he added: “We will want feedback, not just from public authorities but from members of the public. Our questions will include asking: ‘What further classes of information or further detail can be included in publication schemes?’ and: ‘How should publication schemes evolve in light of new technologies?'”
Other topics covered in the Commissioner’s speech on the state of information rights in the UK included:
- new technologies: the Commissioner stated it’s “vital that the Freedom of Information regime responds to the new demand for information online”
- unstructured data: Graham asserted that unstructured information – such as e-mails and memos – are “important in delivering accountability and holding public authorities to account”
- service delivery changes: The Information Commissioner warned that “contracting out and the involvement of new providers… must not reduce the citizen’s right to know”
- the ‘balance’ between transparency and privacy: Graham made it absolutely clear that “just saying there’s a balance doesn’t itself strike the balance… the decisive factor must be a sober assessment of the competing interests… and privacy shouldn’t always be claimed as a barrier to transparency”
- anonymisation: The ICO is developing a Code of Practice on anonymisation under Section 51 of the Data Protection Act
- Protection of Freedoms Bill: the Commissioner gave the ICO’s view on the information rights aspects of the proposals, including DNA profiling, issues surrounding CCTV and vetting checks
The full text of Christopher Graham’s speech can be accessed on the PDF link provided at the foot of this page
ICO issues advice on the disclosure of research information
The Information Commissioner’s Office has also published guidance on freedom of information legislation and research information aimed specifically at public authorities in the higher education sector.
The guidance has been put together following some recommendations made in the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report on the disclosure of data about climate change involving the University of East Anglia.
It aims to increase academics’ and researchers’ understanding of freedom of information legislation and to help practitioners to comply with their legal obligations.
The ICO has recently established a Higher Education (HE) sector panel made up of representatives from universities and HE organisations across the UK. The ICO consulted the panel on drawing up the guidance and continues to work closely with them.
Head of policy pelivery, Steve Wood, explained: “It’s important that all HE institutions comply with their obligations under freedom of information legislation. However, we appreciate the distinctive challenges that requests can pose. This guidance should help institutions to understand when they can apply exemptions to protect important research information.”
Key advice listed in the guidance is as follows:
- the public interest test: the guidance highlights the importance of the public interest test and factors in favour of disclosure that should be considered by HE institutions
- commercial information: many universities and research institutes work in partnership with third parties and will hold commercially sensitive information… the guidance makes clear that disclosures under FOI should not undermine their ability to do this… if there’s a genuine need to protect information from disclosure it can be refused
- free and frank discussion: the guidance acknowledges the importance of academics and researchers being able to exchange views internally and to formulate and debate opinions relating to research away from external scrutiny… protection for this type of information is provided by Section 36 of the Act (prejudice to the conduct of public affairs)
- vexatious requests: while most requesters use the legislation responsibly, there is occasionally some misuse of the rights provided by the law – or circumstances where requests become overly burdensome, disrupt a public authority’s ability to perform their core functions or appear to be part of an intention to disrupt or attack the public authority’s performance… the guidance highlights the provisions under FOI legislation which give some exceptions to the duty to deal with such requests
- proactive disclosure: a number of useful sector-led initiatives on openness and research data – such as the RCUK Common Principles on Data Policy and ESRC’S guidance on data management plans – demonstrate an acceptance in making research data available and a commitment to openness and transparency in the sector… the guidance aims to complement the work the sector is already doing by emphasising the benefits of proactive disclosure of information and acknowledging the public interest in their work
- personal e-mail accounts: the guidance includes a reference to information held on personal e-mail accounts and confirms that if it’s related to public authority business then it can be subject to disclosure under the legislation… when searching for information in response to requests, staff should consider if it’s appropriate to ask colleagues whether information is held in a personal e-mail account (the ICO recommends that official work is stored on properly secure networks rather than personal e-mail accounts)