It was not an earth-shattering revelation, but that, of course, is the point. Why should such information not be available as a matter of course?
Grayling believes the FoI Act should be used for “those who want to understand why and how government is taking decisions”. Fair enough — up to a point.
That sounds suspiciously like an attempt to narrow the Act’s parameters in order to render it meaningless.
The only way to know whether taxes are being properly spent, authorities are acting appropriately and government is behaving wisely is by winkling information out of public bodies.
The “knowledge is power” cliché is hugely relevant to this argument. Yes, there will be misuse. But in the vast majority of cases, inquiries have been justifiable.
Aside from diluting the Act’s ambit, the other threat is to introduce charges.
This would likely choke off the number of requests because of the cost to local newspaper journalists and freelancers, not forgetting concerned citizens.
The major loser, however, will be the public.
In truth, the provisions of the FoI Act need to be extended. The Government should really think again about this illiberal attempt to stifle investigative journalism.
Roy Greenslade is Professor of Journalism, City University London, and writes a blog for The Guardian
