Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Bridget Prentice (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 18 May 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill.


Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill

The exemption, as currently drafted, is already subject to the public interest test. If the amendments were made, it would make it much more difficult for public authorities to carry out requests. My final point is that that the Bill as drafted contains express provision to ensure that it will not have retrospective effect. It is important that the House is aware of that. Any request for information received by a public authority prior to the commencement of the Act, should the Bill ever become an Act, will be treated as though the Act were not in force. It would be for both Houses of Parliament to comply with freedom of information requests received up to the date of commencement. Amendment No. 26 would put a limit on the exemption, and that is inconsistent with the rest of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It would unnecessarily complicate the operation of that Act. As I said at the beginning, the Government remain neutral on the Bill. It is for the House to make up its mind whether it thinks that the 2000 Act, which I commend to the House as an excellent piece of legislation that created transparency that was not there before, needs to be further enhanced in this private Member’s Bill. That is a matter entirely for the House, but I can tell the House that, on behalf of the Government, I will not vote in Divisions on the amendments, or on the Bill’s Third Reading, should we reach it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c899 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Freedom of information House of Lords House of Commons Exemptions Members
Legislation
Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk