Freedom of Information part two

Records produced on issues relating to public authorities such as city councils and healthcares are paid for by the taxpayer and therefore we, as a nation, own it. The Freedom of Information Act is made for journalists, citizens, taxpayers - no one is excluded from requesting information.

There are 130,000 bodies covered by the act and there are 100,000 freedom of information requests a year, costing around £34 million to produce.

Critics have argued that the act was made purely to make journalists jobs easier, although research has found that only 12% of requests come from journalists.

The Kingsnorth Climate protest concerned the protest arguing for the prevention of a coal - powered station from being built. A report stated that the protest was very violent and that 70 police officers had been hurt. David Laws, a Liberal Democrat MP put in an FOI request and found that only 12 had been injured and only four needed medical treatment. Not as violent as previously claimed!

Andrew Marr's interview with Tony Blair, revealed how much of a big mistake during his time in office, the implementation of the FOI act was. Perhaps this is why it has been seen to have a 'chilling effect' in terms of organisations having to self-sensor themselves for fear of having to reveal information to the public at large. This has the effect of reducing the likelihood of individuals discussing things openly or freely.

Journalists claim that there is at present, a high watermark of FOI requests and that individuals are now resorting to what is known as 'sofa chat'. This is where, as opposed to expressing views or plans in letter, text or email, individuals will have an informal chat, to prevent the likelihood of an FOI request being made.

The BBC is in favour of FOI and state that the basic principle is that:

'Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled to have that information communicated to him.'

FOI requests are expressed in either writing or email.

Private companies such as Coca Cola cannot be contacted for FOI requests as although, we buy their products, we do not fund their existence.

Public authorities can say no if producing the records will cost more than £600 (or £450 for smaller authorities) or if the information is exempt:

• Absolute exemption - i.e. court records, security services
• Qualified exemption - i.e. ministerial communications, commercial confidentiality

Individuals must balance the public interest with the need to express information freely. This is however, not specified in law and so must be proven.

In terms of time, organisations must 'respond promptly'. They must send a response within 20 days and then they have 40 days to either produce a record of give reason(s) for why they cannot.

One qualified exemption that is very vague and considered a 'get out' is:

• That information 'intended' for future publication does not have to be published. However, what is considered a reasonable time scale is uncertain and subjective.

If they say no, then the next stages are:

• to request an internal review
•  to visit an information commissioner (six month waiting list)
• to go to an information tribunal
• to lastly visit the High court.

The FOI act is the only reason that the expenses scandal came out. The Daily Telegraph pursued the case and went right up to the High court, spending £150,000.

I and a fellow student then proceeded to send an FOI request to the Winchester and Eastleigh healthcare NHS trust.

We asked them to produce a report regarding the number, age and occupations of patients who had been prescribed anti-depressants and/or Viagra in the years 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010.