[open-government] Fwd: [ORG-law] UK foia reach on private government subcontractors

Tue Nov 16 15:42:31 UTC 2010

Actually, there is already one law as far as I am concerned that does this
in South Africa. Unsure about
implementation. Hope it helps.
 Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act 2 of 2000)
Part 3: Access to Records of Private Bodies
Chapter 1: Right Of Access
50. Right of access to records of private bodies

1)        A requester <javascript:void(0);> must be given access to any
record <javascript:void(0);> of a private body if--

a)        that record is required for the exercise or protection of any
rights;

b)        that person <javascript:void(0);> complies with the procedural
requirements in this Act <javascript:void(0);> relating to a request for
access <javascript:void(0);> to that record; and

c)         access to that record is not refused in terms of any ground for
refusal contemplated in Chapter
4<http://www.acts.co.za/prom_of_access_to_info/62_interpretation.htm>of
this Part.

2)        In addition to the requirements referred to in subsection (1),
when a public body, referred to in paragraph (a) or (b)(i) of the definition
of "public body <javascript:void(0);>" in section
1<http://www.acts.co.za/prom_of_access_to_info/1_definitions.htm>,
requests access to a record of a private body <javascript:void(0);> for the
exercise or protection of any rights, other than its rights, it must be
acting in the public interest.

3)        A request contemplated in subsection (1) includes a request for
access to a record containing personal information
<javascript:void(0);>about the requester or the person on whose behalf
the request is made.

On 16 November 2010 15:18, <toby at law-democracy.org> wrote:

>
> I believe there were reforms on the way (probably by way of regulation but
> perhaps by amendments to the legislation) to substantially extend the
> reach of the law to private bodies undertaking public functions, but I am
> not sure exactly where they are. Ditto for Scotland.
>
> Toby
>
> > -Response form our legal working group about UK:
> >
> > The FOI doesn't have a functional definition of a public authority.
> > Public authorities are those defined as such in the act or subordinate
> > legislation. There are many anomalies - for example a wholly owned
> > subsidiary of a public authority is also subject to the act (by
> > section 6) but a subsidiary of more than one public authority is not
> > (so many local government consortia fall outside).
> >
> > Information held "on behalf of" a public body is also subject to the
> > act, which does extend the reach somewhat, but that phrase has caused
> > a lot of argument.
> >
> > There are some silly exceptions because of the way the act works, for
> > example the House of Commons Commission claims not to be a public
> > body:
> >
> >
> http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/crowned_portcullis_2#incoming-80758
> >
> > The House of Commons itself ceases to exist when Parliament is
> > dissolved for a general election, so this produced some peculiar (and
> > frustrating) results at the last election.
> >
> > I have certainly been pushing for changes and extensions here.
> > Something simple, such as any corporation with more public authority
> > members than not ought to be a public authority (to get in all those
> > local authority consortia etc). There are plenty more.
> >
> > The team at What Do They Know (team at whatdotheyknow.com) might be very
> > helpful if you asked them nicely about it. I suspect its something My
> > Society in general is very interested in.
> >
> > ---------------
> >
> > On 16 November 2010 11:53, Javier Ruiz <javier at openrightsgroup.org>
> wrote:
> >> Dear friends
> >> is there anything like this in UK FOIA ?
> >> The government has announced plans to amend FOIA towards "right to
> >> data",
> > it
> >> may be an opportunity to put forward other amendments to extend who is
> >> covered by it.
> >> best, Javier
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Katleen Janssen <Katleen.Janssen at law.kuleuven.be>
> >> Date: 2010/11/15
> >> Subject: Re: [open-government] Defining Open Government Data?
> >> To: Tony Kennick <tony at technophobia.com>,
> >> "open-government at lists.okfn.org"
> >> <open-government at lists.okfn.org>
> >>
> >>
> >> The ‘privatization of data’ through outsourcing can be a concern, but
> > there
> >> are some examples where the definition of ‘public authority’ subject to
> > the
> >> FOI legislation should be broad enough to cover these types of
> >> outsourcing
> >> deals.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> For instance, the Belgian legislation includes bodies that have been
> >> entrusted by a ‘real’ public body with a service performed in the public
> >> interest. The European directive on environmental information should
> >> probably also be broad enough to cover these situations.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Is the UK definition not broad enough to cover this?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> katleen
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org
> >> [mailto:open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of Tony
> >> Kennick
> >> Sent: maandag 15 november 2010 13:01
> >> To: open-government at lists.okfn.org
> >>
> >> Subject: Re: [open-government] Defining Open Government Data?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/11/15 Javier Ruiz <javier at openrightsgroup.org>
> >>
> >> One of the key improvements to this area would be to extend the FoI
> >> obligations to private companies doing public works.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Any such extension would need careful drafting so it couldn't be used by
> >> competitors to dig out data from parts of any such company.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  The amount of "public data" could almost disappear in cases such as
> > Suffolk
> >> council in UK, which plan to outsource every single
> >> service http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11398678. Even the remaining info
> >> on
> >> contracting would likely be denied on commercial confidentiality
> >> grounds.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The governments plans for data to be opened up so the public can
> >> directly
> >> assess the performance of local authorities only makes sense if it
> >> doesn't
> >> matter whether the council provides services directly or by contracting
> >> out. Whole swathes of data publishing will need to be set out in
> >> contracts
> >> as a required as part of the service delivery.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Tony Kennick
> >>
> >> Technophobia Limited.
> >>
> >> The Workstation
> >>
> >> 15 Paternoster Row
> >>
> >> SHEFFIELD
> >>
> >> England
> >>
> >> S1 2BX
> >>
> >> Phone: +44 (0)114 2212123  Fax: +44 (0)114 2212124
> >>
> >> Email: tony at technophobia.co.uk
> >>
> >> WWW: http://www.technophobia.com
> >>
> >> Twitter: @WeTechnoPhobia
> >>
> >> Registered in England and Wales Company No. 3063669
> >>
> >> VAT registration No. 598 7858 42
> >>
> >> ISO 9001:2000 Accredited Company No. 21227
> >>
> >> ISO 14001:2004 Accredited Company No. E997
> >>
> >> ISO 27001:2005 (BS7799) Accredited Company No. IS 508906
> >>
> >> Investor in People Certified No. 101507
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The contents of this email are confidential to the addressee and are
> >>
> >> intended solely for the recipients use. If you  are not the addressee,
> >> you
> >>
> >> have received this email in error. Any disclosure, copying, distribution
> > or
> >>
> >> action taken  in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Any opinions expressed in this email are those of the author personally
> > and
> >>
> >> not TechnoPhobia Limited who do not  accept responsibility for the
> > contents
> >>
> >> of the message.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> All email communications, in and out of TechnoPhobia, are recorded for
> >>
> >> monitoring purposes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> open-government mailing list
> >> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ORG-law mailing list
> >> ORG-law at lists.openrightsgroup.org
> >> http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/org-law
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Francis Davey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ORG-law mailing list
> > ORG-law at lists.openrightsgroup.org
> > http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/org-law
> > _______________________________________________
> > open-government mailing list
> > open-government at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
> >
>
>
> ___________________________________
> Toby Mendel
>
> Centre for Law and Democracy
> toby at law-democracy.org
> Tel:  +1 902 431-3688
> Fax: +1 902 431-3689
> www.law-democracy.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
>

-- 
Fabrizio Scrollini
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/attachments/20101116/6b50bceb/attachment-0001.html>