MPs have no reason to be exempt from FoI law, watchdog warns

A campaign by MPs to remove themselves from open government laws in order to protect the privacy of their constituents has been seriously undermined by the UK's information watchdog.

Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, said he had not received any complaints from members of the public that their correspondence with an MP had been wrongly disclosed under the terms of the two-year-old legislation.

Related articles

• Freedom Of Information: Who can save the Freedom of Information Act?
• Search the news archive for more stories

MPs supporting a private member's Bill that would exclude Parliament from the scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act (FoI) claim they are acting in the interests of their constituents. But Mr Thomas confirmed yesterday that his office had not been asked to deal with a single complaint about an MP's correspondence.

Mr Thomas told a Freedom of Information conference in London yesterday: "After nearly two-and-a-half years, Freedom of Information (FoI) is delivering real benefits. It is now recognised as a key feature of our modern democracy, which is changing public-sector culture. There is a presumption of disclosure, unless there is a genuine reason to withhold information. This must trump any instinct of unnecessary secrecy, which simply suggests a public authority has something to hide.

"There are bound to be times when the FoI may be uncomfortable. But openness - even where it reveals uncertainties, disagreements or embarrassments - treats citizens as grown-ups and reflects the realities of public life. People respect honesty, not cover-up."

He added: "Freedom of information reinforces good government. Some people fear that FoI can have a 'chilling effect' and that nothing gets written down. On the contrary - the possibility of disclosure encourages a record of full, accurate and impartial advice from civil servants and supports the principle that officials advise and ministers decide. Greater openness will deter spin and informal decision-making."

Meanwhile, the Tory who proposed an exemption from FoI requirements for MPs, David Maclean, has been criticised for his purchase of a quad bike on expenses. Mr Maclean, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, says he uses the £3,300 bike to get around his large rural constituency.

Mr Thomas said he fully recognised the need for "private space" for policy-making in suitable cases, but warned public bodies to treat each case on its own merits. The Information Commissioner's Office has made it clear that public interest arguments for non-disclosure must be convincing in each case.

He said: "The FoI has clearly struck a chord. It has been heavily used - especially by members of the public. My office acts as the referee in cases where requesters complain they did not get what they asked for. But the vast majority of cases do not need our intervention, and we are able to resolve half of all cases informally.

"Research conducted by my office shows a dramatic jump in just two years [2004-2006] from 51 per cent to 72 per cent in those who agree that access to official information increases confidence in public authorities."

But Mr Thomas also said he was concerned about the number of "pointless and mischievous" requests made. He cited a request to the Foreign Office on the amount spent on Ferrero Rocher chocolates and one on eligible bachelors in the Hampshire police.

The Government is consulting on whether to restrict the FoI Act, to limit costs. A request is already rejected if it costs more than £600 to process, but Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, has suggested including the cost of the time spent dealing with requests.