My Lords, I thank the Minister for introducing the order so clearly and other noble Lords who have asked questions of some importance, particularly the final question, which the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, majored on, which was around the Government’s plans for reviewing the Freedom of Information Act.
I know that the Minister is giving what they nowadays describe as a keynote address this Thursday at the Westminster Legal Policy Forum on the very topical subject of: "““The future of Freedom of Information—challenges for expansion””."
I, alas, cannot be present because of duties in the House. If this sounds like an advertisement to go and hear the noble Lord, that is exactly what it is. However, I hope that he may be able to say something both this afternoon, in response to his noble friend Lord Maclennan, and on Thursday, because I know that he has particular duties in ministerial terms as far as this Act is concerned. I hope that he can perhaps unveil slightly today what he may say to his other audience on Thursday.
We support the order. The Freedom of Information Act was one of the substantial achievements of the previous Government. It will be long-standing and of substantial value to our freedoms. It does not always seem that way if you are sitting in a ministerial chair or even in a senior civil servant’s chair. It can be awkward, difficult and seem sometimes almost impossible, but that is precisely why it is in existence. So we support both the Act and this minor order—minor not for the three bodies involved but in the great scheme of things. It was in March 2010, as paragraph 8.4 of the Explanatory Memorandum tells us, that the decision to bring these bodies within the Act under Section 5 was made and communicated to each body. We are delighted to see the order before the Committee today.
My only question to the Minister is one that I mentioned to him briefly earlier. We read in paragraph 8.4 that two of the bodies ““welcomed publicly”” the fact that an order such as this one was to be made, bringing them within the scope of the Act. It does not say anything about the response of the third body, UCAS. Can the Minister help the Committee with how UCAS responded?
As I said at the start of my few remarks, we support what the Government are doing on this occasion.
Freedom of Information (Designation as Public Authorities) Order 2011
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 17 October 2011.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Freedom of Information (Designation as Public Authorities) Order 2011.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c19-20GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 21:18:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773605
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773605
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_773605