There Is No Freedom Of Information Once We Charge For It

Researching Reform

A new consultation on Freedom Of Information requests, which have until now allowed members of the public to access government data for free, is seeking to charge for the service, and has left people feeling deeply divided about the proposal.

Some have suggested that to charge for this information would limit a fundamental right, one which allows for greater transparency inside government, whilst others have taken the view that charging a fee is only reasonable in light of the man hours it requires to answer these requests and source the information asked for, where possible.

So who is right, and how should we address yet another cut to services which are most often used either by the most vulnerable in society, or on their behalf?

The Freedom Of Information Act was implemented in 2005 by a Labour government, and celebrated its 10th birthday last year. Among some of its victories, was…

View original post 655 more words


About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to There Is No Freedom Of Information Once We Charge For It

  1. T Birks says:

    there should not be a charge for this .. if the government want to save money they could reduce the numbers in the house of Lords, cut politician’s salaries, stop invading other countries and killing their people.

  2. Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee says:

    The United Nations Human Rights Commissioner: Geneva.

    It is open for any Person or Body to make a complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

    Many Independent Countries are not members of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

    There are Judgments given in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on the 14th October 2015 which are published in the Public Domain

    Deliberate Concealment, Mistake or Omission of Section 4 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
    Divorce not precluded by previous Judicial Separation;

    (1) A Person shall not be prevented from presenting a Petition for Divorce, or the Court from granting a decree of Divorce by reason only that the Petitioner or Respondent has at any time, on the same facts or substantially the same facts as those proved in support of the Petition, been granted a decree of Judicial Separation or an Order under,…..



    The Limitation Act 1980: Section 4, 6, 9, 24, 32, does also apply.

    There is no Leap Frog System from the United Kingdom to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva, whilst there is a conflict of Interests.

    There is a Legal Right for any Citizen to take Private Criminal Prosecution by Virtue of Section 6 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985,
    This is not mentioned under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 whilst Section 78 is self explanatory.

    There are no Court Fees to paid in a Criminal Cause or Matter except on the Crown Side-

    Article 27 of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights signed at the United Nations in 1966

    Yours Faithfully

    Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s