Despite numermous efforts to weaken it, the Freedom of Information Act remains invaluable to investigative journalism. Ian Weinfass reports


A right to to know


T


wenty-one years ago, if a journalist wanted a breakdown of which roads were the worst for parking fines or to find out the date which then prime minister Tony Blair ordered officials to exempt Formula One from the


tobacco advertising ban, it was extremely difficult to find out. After 1 January 2005, when the Freedom of Information Act came into force in the UK, getting such answers became as easy as sending an email. At least in theory. The law gives the public a right of access to information held by public authorities and journalists have been among its biggest users.


“I think it can be a really great tool for those who are just starting out,” says Jenna Corderoy, investigative reporter at openDemocracy. “I found it extremely helpful as a young journalist who wanted to get exclusive information without necessarily having the contacts in place and, as I’ve got older, I’ve used it more and more.” Corderoy says she was inspired by freelance journalist


Heather Brooke, whose attempts to obtain information on MPs’ expenses via the new act were knocked back. Similar requests from Sunday Times reporter Jon Ungoed-Thomas and the Sunday Telegraph’s Ben Leapman were also refused, leading to legal action and the high court ruling that the information should be released.


“


BEING clear and specific about the information being sought is the most important thing when drafting an FOI. “Some people can go in with


really wide, vague requests. You have to play the game by


10 | theJournalist


narrowing it down,” says home affairs and security journalist Lizzie Dearden. Some 23 exemptions can be


used to decline requests, including those around national security, personal information and cost.


Some people think it’s about stats, but you can ask for documents and they can reveal extraordinary things


Data on redactions that were due to be made was then


leaked to the Daily Telegraph and became the MPs’ expenses scandal of 2009. George Greenwood, who carries out investigations for


The Times, also points to the scandal as an example of public interest reporting that followed the introduction of what he calls a ‘crucial tool’. “I’d encourage more journalists to make use of the act… because of its unique ability to force the release of cast-iron documentation to support public interest reporting that even well placed human sources can’t always provide,” he says. Tony Blair, whose government introduced the FOI Act, would


later describe himself as a ‘nincompoop’ for having done so. “Political parties love freedom of information in opposition


but quickly lose enthusiasm in government,” says Maurice Frankel, who has been director of the Campaign for Freedom of Information since 1987. The group worked alongside opposition and backbench MPs after being founded in 1984, helping produce several private members’ bills and critiques of draft legislation before the act came into force. “I was always pessimistic about our chances of getting a freedom of information act in the UK or, if we got one, of it being any good. You can find countries with FOI acts that barely function: they are so slow or expensive that campaigners, journalists and the ordinary public don’t make much use of them,” he says. “I was always prepared for us to have a pyrrhic victory, but I think the act itself is a lot better than it might have been. “Luckily, we’ve avoided that and fought off several attempts


to introduce charges that would be a serious problem.” The campaign has argued against numerous attempts to limit the scope and operation of the act, the first coming as early as October 2006. Most recently, an FOI Commission was set up under David Cameron’s Conservative administration in 2015 to consider charging fees for access to information and new exemptions for the government. It received universal condemnation across Fleet Street and, ultimately, little was changed. Nonetheless, public bodies’ compliance with the act has


‘The more practice, the juicier the result’ “Once you know all the


loopholes, you can pre-empt them. For the use of force request, I said ‘I’m not seeking any personal information’, ‘I accept redactions relating to operational procedures’ etc.”


OpenDemocracy’s


Jenna Corderoy notes: “The more practice you have with requests and challenging refusals, the juicier the information you can get.”


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28