FOI act to be extended to AGS, when?

Samba

I was hoping someone could shed some light on this matter.

For a number of years there's been calls to extend the FOI to AGS and other financial bodies etc..

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/mhkfmhaugbmh/

4 years on, it seems the same recommendations are still be touted...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/freedom-of-information-act-should-cover-gardai-central-bank-nama-commissioner-503684.html

Obviously it raises a number of security issues, which begs another question, will it ever happen?

Samba

Samba wrote: »

I was hoping someone could shed some light on this matter.

For a number of years there's been calls to extend the FOI to AGS and other financial bodies etc..

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/mhkfmhaugbmh/

4 years on, it seems the same recommendations are still be touted...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/freedom-of-information-act-should-cover-gardai-central-bank-nama-commissioner-503684.html

Obviously it raises a number of security issues, which begs another question, will it ever happen?

What would you be hoping to find out?

Samba

foreign wrote: »

What would you be hoping to find out?

Nothing, perhaps another forum would be more appropriate for this discussion? (mods?)

It's a fleeting interest, I've no hidden agenda, or any desire to find any particular information, however I do find this rather peculiar.

Exert from link 1.

In her annual report, she said the continued exemption of An Garda Siochana from the right-to-know laws leaves Ireland out of kilter with the rest of the developed world.

I'm just curious why after all these years nothing has come to fruition?

Delancey

Its an interesting question OP , very true to say that AGS is behind almost all European countries in its secrecy.
It seems that even basic documents are not allowed into the public domain - can't see it changing anytime soon.

Samba

Samba wrote: »

Nothing, perhaps another forum would be more appropriate for this discussion? (mods?)

Then why ask the question in this forum?

Geansai

foreign wrote: »

What would you be hoping to find out?

foreign wrote: »

Then why ask the question in this forum?

Why so negative against the OP. It is a reasonable discussion point in this forum, regardless of the OPs motives.

Provided there is no security threat the the state (be it from criminals or others), and it does not affect the judicial process in any way, then, in my opinion, the FOI act should inlcude the AGS.

Geansai

Geansai wrote: »

Why so negative against the OP. It is a reasonable discussion point in this forum, regardless of the OPs motives.

Provided there is no security threat the the state (be it from criminals or others), and it does not affect the judicial process in any way, then, in my opinion, the FOI act should inlcude the AGS.

My first question is a valid one. What do people hope to find out? My second question is about the OP saying their post might be in the wrong forum.

Shield

foreign wrote: »

What would you be hoping to find out?

He never said he was hoping to find out anything foreign. He asked "will it ever happen?" and this being a discussion forum, he's perfectly entitled to start a thread in here which could host an interesting discussion on the issue.

foreign wrote: »

Then why ask the question in this forum?

Leave him alone will ye? If none of the mods are hounding him for answers to irrelevant questions, then you shouldn't either. If you're not willing to participate in the point that he raised, then don't post. It's his first time posting in ES. Lay off.

Samba

foreign wrote: »

Then why ask the question in this forum?

foreign wrote: »

My first question is a valid one. What do people hope to find out? My second question is about the OP saying their post might be in the wrong forum.

To be perfectly honest, I'm starting to wonder if I posted in the wrong forum solely based on your responses, I've asked a legitimate question, which you've responded to with more questions?


I'm not sure why, but despite numerous calls from the Data Commissioner after all these years, something seems to be holding up the process of allowing the AGS to come under the FOI and i'm curious to know why?

I don't think it's an unreasonable question, yet I get the impression you're assuming that I'm hoping to uncover information that will be used to put AGS in a negative light, when that's just not the case at all. That's just an impression but it did get me wondering, perhaps I won't be able to have an unbiased and level headed discussion on the issue in this forum.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the question either, any state funded body should be covered by the FOI act in the interest of transparency. While you assume that my line of inquiry would most likely be an attempt to put AGS in a negative light (that's the impression you've given me), positive things can also come from transparency.

I've no problem with the question being asked but I will ask again, what areas of information would you hope to see if AGS did come under the FOI? Our crime figures are released by the CSO, our budgets are published, as are our employee numbers. Our vehicle numbers, etc. What is left?

source

Data protection requests can be made of AGS right now, the thing is, you will only get information on yourself and it will be limited due to operationally sensitivity.

You will never be able to see intelligence reports, and will never be able to see information on ongoing investigations. Even Gardai are blocked from seeing information on sexual offences unless they are directly involved in the investigation.

The only information that is available to be given out would be information that is already available through other mediums.

For example conviction details are published by the courts service on their website, Statistical information is available through CSO and information on pay and numbers are available through the Department of Justice.

The only other information that exists are operational information and case files.

Samba

foreign wrote: »

I've no problem with the question being asked but I will ask again, what areas of information would you hope to see if AGS did come under the FOI? Our crime figures are released by the CSO, our budgets are published, as are our employee numbers. Our vehicle numbers, etc. What is left?

O.k,

Now I understand the reasoning behind your questions! You make a fair point, I wasn't aware that so much detailed information was currently readily available.

source wrote: »

Data protection requests can be made of AGS right now, the thing is, you will only get information on yourself and it will be limited due to operationally sensitivity.

You will never be able to see intelligence reports, and will never be able to see information on ongoing investigations. Even Gardai are blocked from seeing information on sexual offences unless they are directly involved in the investigation.

The only information that is available to be given out would be information that is already available through other mediums.

For example conviction details are published by the courts service on their website, Statistical information is available through CSO and information on pay and numbers are available through the Department of Justice.

The only other information that exists are operational information and case files.

Thanks for that.

What are your opinions on the DC making these calls/recommendations (perhaps needlessly?) to bring Ireland in line with international standards, is it simply a case of a desire to conform to these standards and to be seen in line with Europe?

Eru

Samba wrote: »

I was hoping someone could shed some light on this matter.

For a number of years there's been calls to extend the FOI to AGS and other financial bodies etc..

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/mhkfmhaugbmh/

4 years on, it seems the same recommendations are still be touted...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/freedom-of-information-act-should-cover-gardai-central-bank-nama-commissioner-503684.html

Obviously it raises a number of security issues, which begs another question, will it ever happen?

Certain aspects of this act DO apply to AGS already, certificates of character and vetting for example allow information held to be released. What the OP is looking at I assume, is being able to request to know what AGS has on YOU purely because you want to know.

The danger with this is deciding what qualifies and what doesnt or from what sources. If we recieved a complaint against you should that be released and if so, should it include who made the complaint? t

Theres valid arguements for both sides of this debate and certainly we can see some information would cause o harm to anyone but in a time when Garda numbers and hours are being cut do we want more Gardai on the streets or searching through FOI requests and editing the informaiton for public view?

Personally I think FOI requests should only extend to convictions and possible arrests with the fee being higher.

Samba wrote: »

O.k,What are your opinions on the DC making these calls/recommendations (perhaps needlessly?) to bring Ireland in line with international standards, is it simply a case of a desire to conform to these standards and to be seen in line with Europe?

We are in line, no police force gives out intelligence based information or case information in europe. The US gives out a lot, too much in my opinion and it leads to trials by media.

AS for the DC, wouldnt be the first government official to be wrong about AGS, in fact probable not the first this week.

Samba

Eru wrote: »

What the OP is looking at I assume, is being able to request to know what AGS has on YOU purely because you want to know.

Sigh,

Firstly please don't assume anything about me or my motives, I take particular displeasure to the fact that you decided to emphasise your grossly inaccurate assumptions using caps.

Can we please move on from the theory that my sole intent for this topic of discussion is suit an ulterior motive. This simply is not the case and I can't put enough emphasis on that, about the worse AGS would have on me is a fine for speeding and breaking a red light 5 years ago!


Now if you'll excuse me, I've bales of cocaine to load on to the van, once i'm done with that, I'll be back to discuss some of the other good points you raised.

Samba

Eru wrote: »

Theres valid arguements for both sides of this debate and certainly we can see some information would cause o harm to anyone but in a time when Garda numbers and hours are being cut do we want more Gardai on the streets or searching through FOI requests and editing the informaiton for public view?

This is an excellent point, if extending the FOI to cover AGS is going to adversely affect the quality of policing then this needs to be addressed before you start implementing any proposals. You could argue to simply look at how other police forces managed, but then none of those comparisons would be suitable or relevant, unless they were implemented during recessionary times.

Eru wrote: »

Personally I think FOI requests should only extend to convictions and possible arrests with the fee being higher.

I think if it is extended to AGS in any form, this should be the case, as it may alleviate the issue of the time consuming nature of FOI requests.

Eru wrote: »

We are in line, no police force gives out intelligence based information or case information in europe. The US gives out a lot, too much in my opinion and it leads to trials by media.

Well various reports would tend to disagree with you, as does the DC.

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=111773

Police forces and freedom of information

Geansai wrote: »

Provided there is no security threat the the state (be it from criminals or others), and it does not affect the judicial process in any way, then, in my opinion, the FOI act should inlcude the AGS.

Lets discuss the issue on the above basis, which I would be entirely in agreement with.

Eru wrote: »

AS for the DC, wouldnt be the first government official to be wrong about AGS, in fact probable not the first this week.

Unfortunately in most circumstances I can appreciate that this is the case, too many broad statements are made by Government officials about AGS, when in reality they don't have a clue, but that's not to say that occasionally they may have a valid point.

Samba

Samba wrote: »

What are your opinions on the DC making these calls/recommendations (perhaps needlessly?) to bring Ireland in line with international standards, is it simply a case of a desire to conform to these standards and to be seen in line with Europe?

Maybe the Data Commissioner should actually focus on problems relating to data loss such as the type happening with the HSE.

He might also come up with a standard data request letter for the Gardaí, requests take on different forms depending on what organisation/company you deal with.

And I think he was giving out about the number of CCTV cameras last week. He need's to realise that 1984 is a work of fiction and that CCTV cameras help the Gardaí in their work! Look at the success of CCTV in identifying rioters in the UK.

Eru

Samba wrote: »

Sigh,

Firstly please don't assume anything about me or my motives, I take particular displeasure to the fact that you decided to emphasise your grossly inaccurate assumptions using caps.

Can we please move on from the theory that my sole intent for this topic of discussion is suit an ulterior motive. This simply is not the case and I can't put enough emphasis on that, about the worse AGS would have on me is a fine for speeding and breaking a red light 5 years ago!


Now if you'll excuse me, I've bales of cocaine to load on to the van, once i'm done with that, I'll be back to discuss some of the other good points you raised.

Not once did I accuse you of anything and I have no idea where your getting that from so stop being paranoid or looking to cause an arguement because all I and Foreign have attempted to do is assist you in gaining a better understanding of AGS and FOI requests. We know the answer already, we are AGS.

Samba

Eru wrote: »

Not once did I accuse you of anything and I have no idea where your getting that from so stop being paranoid or looking to cause an arguement because all I and Foreign have attempted to do is assist you in gaining a better understanding of AGS and FOI requests. We know the answer already, we are AGS.

Originally Posted by Eru
What the OP is looking at I assume, is being able to request to know what AGS has on YOU purely because you want to know.

Consider the hostile reception my question received, then consider the wording of the above quote and I think you'll find it's easy to see how I construed this as you making assumptions towards me, please don't confuse that with paranoia, perhaps you should choose your words more wisely, so that they aren't as easily misconstrued. You'll have to excuse my cynical comments.

I'm aware of the fact you're both AGS, it was a bit of a give away when you referred to AGS as 'we'. I didn't come here for an argument either, I was interested in having a discussion on the matter but at this point I feel it's best to take it up elsewhere.

On a final note, as I said, I think you raised some very valid points with regards to the problems it may pose, but none of which are unsolvable and ultimately, I have to disagree with your assertions. If other countries who have extended FOI acts to policing forces can cope, then I see no reason why Ireland can't either.

At this moment in time it wouldn't be ideal for obvious reasons, but in the near future (if and when things improve), I see no valid reason why it shouldn't be extended to AGS and indeed any other state asset, body or service.

monument

If you want to know what people may want to FOI from a police force search google for something like 'met police FOI' or search a name of another police force and FOI. There will also be more local examples if it was to happen here, but doing that search should give you a good idea.

A huge amount of the bodies under FOI would if they could claim there is no reason for them to be under FOI.

stevenmu

For what it's worth FOI wouldn't typically be used for a lot of the types of information being used here. FOI would generally be used to get general public interest information (and in the case of AGS this would probably mostly be administrative), for e.g. "how many members are assigned to the traffic corp" or "what was the overtime bill for the Dublin area for the month of June". More specific queries such as "What criminal record does Joe Bloggs have" or "What information does AGS have on me" would typically be Data Protection issues which are different.

Agencies currently subject to FOI all have a number of reasons that they can reject all or part of an FOI request, for example if the answer would contain commercially sensitive information. So there are existing accepted mechanisms to limit the scope of FOI, and it would be pretty easy for AGS to reject requests for "operational reasons".

The downside would be the huge amount of manpower it takes to service FOI requests.

stevenmu

stevenmu wrote: »

For what it's worth FOI wouldn't typically be used for a lot of the types of information being used here. FOI would generally be used to get general public interest information (and in the case of AGS this would probably mostly be administrative), for e.g. "how many members are assigned to the traffic corp" or "what was the overtime bill for the Dublin area for the month of June". More specific queries such as "What criminal record does Joe Bloggs have" or "What information does AGS have on me" would typically be Data Protection issues which are different.

That would be information that would generally be released at the moment.

http://garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=110&Lang=1

monument

foreign wrote: »

That would be information that would generally be released at the moment.

http://garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=110&Lang=1

FOI allows for oversight by a high authority.

In other words, it's not just up to any one police force what they want to release -- it's the same for government departments, agency and other bodies.

monument

monument wrote: »

FOI allows for oversight by a high authority.

In other words, it's not just up to any one police force what they want to release -- it's the same for government departments, agency and other bodies.

But again, it come's down to what do people want to know that is not already in the public domain?

monument

foreign wrote: »

But again, it come's down to what do people want to know that is not already in the public domain?

As I said do a search on Google for a police force covered by FOI, like the Met.

Here's more than 700 example requests, but these would generally exclude journalists' requests: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/the_met

monument

monument wrote: »

As I said do a search on Google for a police force covered by FOI, like the Met.

Here's more than 700 example requests, but these would generally exclude journalists' requests: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/the_met

Cheers for the link. Some interesting stuff and some stuff you can see straight away that will not be given.