I'VE JUST read a cracking story in today's Liverpool Daily Post about the so-called Freedom of Information Act.
It concerns a Katherine Byrne, who is campaigning to save a piece of green space near her homes, and tried to use the Act to back up her case.
She requested to have sent to her a private and confidential report and Liverpool City Council duly obliged.
But guess what? The town hall mandarins had crossed out everything in the report apart from two sentences, and they were "Planning issues in developing on..." and "As the land is designated..."
When asked to explain their move, a spokesman said: "The purpose of issuing the response was to show that the particular report did exist. But as it contained commercially senstive information it was regarded as exempt."
Don't you just love it?
But I'm not surprised as throughout my journalistic career I've lost count of the number of times public bodies have tried to worm their way out of things by citing "commercially sensitivity" and their all-time favourite, the Data Potection Act, which they (wrongly) think means you can't even ask somebody's name.
99 out of 100 their reasoning is utter tripe, balderdash and piffle - they know it and so do I. But the inference is "well, what ya gonna do out it?" and, to be honest, without taking it to the Lord Chancellor, there isn't a lot you can do. Even then there's no guarantee of success.
So take my advice, if you're looking to use FoI do yourself a favour, don't ask anything too interesting or searching which might involve them giving away anything useful.
It also helps if you're either a) prepared to be told they don't have the information or b) accept the fact you'll only get the information - complete with all its bureaucratic jargon and gobbledegiook - at 5pm on 20th working day.
- Post to:
del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Nowpublic
Reddit
« Previous | Home | Next »