What Eric Pickles wants you to see, against (FOI) the reality

14th September, 2013 10:56 am

eric_pickles.jpg

Today the Independet reveals that Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and his officials tried to suppress information that could be ’embarrassing’ to ministers, even though the Information Commissioner ordered them to release the information in a response to FOI requests from Hilary Benn MP.

Now Hilary hits back against his Conservative opposite, explaining why he decided to hold Eric Pickles to account:

Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, is always keen to lecture councils about transparency, but as I’ve found, he’s much less keen to apply it to himself.

Part of the job of an Opposition is to scrutinise the Government and hold ministers to account. As you would expect, as well as asking lots of parliamentary questions, I have used the right available to every citizen to direct a number of freedom of information (FOI) requests to Mr Pickles.

It is usually the case that government departments respond by providing the information requested, but under the direction of Mr Pickles and his advisers, DCLG has shown a marked reluctance to disclose. In a number of cases – even simple ones asking, for example, to see statistics on how many people had built their own houses in the past few years – our FOI requests have been rejected using the ministerial veto under Clause 36 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Of course we sought to appeal against these attempts to prevent the release of the information requested. And so, a year later, after DCLG spent thousands of pounds on lawyers and lots of civil servants’ time on reviews and appeals to conceal the information we sought, last week we won our third victory in just three months at the Information Commissioner.

The first case was Mr Pickles trying to avoid releasing statistics on the number of self-build houses constructed after the then Housing Minister, Grant Shapps, had proclaimed he was leading a “self-build revolution”. What was the answer we eventually forced out of them? The number of self-build houses had gone down.

The second was Mr Pickles trying to hide internal correspondence about criticism of the use of statistics by, once again, Mr Shapps.

And this time it was Mr Pickles trying to resist disclosure of correspondence to do with the awarding of a Portas Pilot to Mr Shapps’ local constituency. Mr Shapps was of course behind the Portas scheme.

What was astonishing about this latest case was that Mr Pickles tried to claim that because it was the Opposition who were asking for the information, the Government should be given special protection from having to disclose it. He seemed to want to be able to decide that if he was responding to a request from the Opposition for information that might embarrass him or his ministers, then he should be given special permission to reject that request. This preposterous idea would, at a stroke, end the notion that Freedom of Information is a right and instead make it a gift that ministers could offer when they wish. Not surprisingly, the Information Commissioner had no truck with it. And thank goodness, because otherwise journalists, opposition politicians, campaigners and all members of the public seeking to hold the Government to account, under the Pickles Doctrine, could have been denied disclosure whenever ministers felt like it. And yet this is the man who extols the “sunlight of transparency”!

It’s also another sign of this Government’s wish to control what happens. Just look at the shambles over the Lobbying Bill and its attempt to gag charities.

The truth is that Eric Pickles makes a lot of statements and promises – press release after press release – but ask him about the things that have really affected families in England and he suddenly goes all quiet. I think it’s because he and his ministers in DCLG really are out of touch with the damage their policies are doing. Here are five of the worst:

1: Imposing higher council tax bills on the poorest families by cutting funding for council tax support, and then trying to blame it all on local authorities.

2: Making unfair cuts to local government, by hitting the poorest areas hardest. When West Oxfordshire – the Prime Minister’s local authority – gets an increase and Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Sheffield – among others – are slashed, something’s gone wrong.

3: Talking a lot about localism while taking new powers to control council publications, remove planning decisions from local communities and weaken planning protection for our high streets and town centres.

4: Wasting a quarter of a billion pounds of public money on trying to persuade councils to change their rubbish collection arrangements, as a result of which just one council decided to move back to weekly rubbish collections.

5: Cutting the budget for investment in affordable housing by 60% and so presiding over a housing crisis, with housing completions now at their lowest peacetime level since the 1920s.

That’s why it’s vital we keep scrutinising Mr Pickles, and calling him and his ministers to account, so that he actually practises what he preaches.

To report anything from the comment section, please e-mail [email protected]
  • Stop City Airport ✈

    But Labour does the exact same thing. Labour run Southwark Council and it’s Leader Peter John have been ordered by the Information Commissioner to release information on the redevelopment of the Haygate Estate to residents.

    They continue to refuse and are using taxpayers money to now got to tribunal.

    The Conservatives are not alone in trying to supress information.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/southwark-in-tribunal-fight-to-keep-15bn-heygate-estate-deal-secret-8808759.html?origin=internalSearch

  • Tim Turner

    I have no doubt that DCLG ministers are not as open as they should be – but Labour has nothing to be proud of over FOI, with several senior figures openly repudiating it, and numerous defensive refusals when they were in power. This article is also misleadingly hyperbolic – the clause 36 ‘ministerial veto’ is simply the use of a mechanism in section 36 which requires a qualified person (in DCLG’s case, a minister) to sign off on a refusal. It would be the ‘Headteacher’s Veto’ in a school.

Latest

  • Featured News High Court set to rule on whether Corbyn is automatically on the ballot paper

    High Court set to rule on whether Corbyn is automatically on the ballot paper

    A High Court judge is expected to rule today on whether Jeremy Corbyn is automatically on the ballot paper in the Labour leadership election. The senior judge will decide on a claim by a Labour donor that the party “misapplied” the rules when its ruling body granted Corbyn a place in the contest without the need to seek a fresh round of nominations from 51 MPs and MEPs. Mr Justice Foskett will respond to the writ put forward by Michael […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured In an Uber economy, an active state can ensure the rewards reach the many and not the few

    In an Uber economy, an active state can ensure the rewards reach the many and not the few

    Technological change is already beginning to transform our world, changing the way we live and work. The challenge for progressives is to find ways of managing the disruption so that all parts of our society can benefit. As my colleague Tom Watson MP has argued, the question is how we make this transformative process our friend and not our foe. The “job for life” is now rare, replaced with less secure work and more self-employment. The next generation of automation […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured This sorry tale of Corbyn and Malhotra’s office politics reveals the mistrust at the top of Labour

    This sorry tale of Corbyn and Malhotra’s office politics reveals the mistrust at the top of Labour

    There are no winners from the row over access to Seema Malhotra’s office. The whole episode – from “unauthorised” entry to complaint, television appeal and then staff being cleared – has led to anger on both sides. To members it has probably prompted despair. Meanwhile the voting public looks upon Labour and is, once again, mystified. The fascination of the press and broadcasters with this dispute is not difficult to understand. It perfectly suited their narrative of another in a series of proxy battles […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Cooper: Labour risks fresh slump in core vote unless it responds to harsher world of work

    Cooper: Labour risks fresh slump in core vote unless it responds to harsher world of work

    Changes in the workplace and the world of big business means Labour is at risk of losing its traditional support base, Yvette Cooper has warned. Some of Labour’s current problems come from a failure to connect with working class voters who have been left behind by globalisation, Cooper argues in a new book published with the Changing Work Centre, joint initiative from the Fabians and Community, the union. Labour is not inspiring those who want to work hard or offering them answers to the […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Smith unveils wealth tax as part of 20 policies to tackle inequality

    Smith unveils wealth tax as part of 20 policies to tackle inequality

    Owen Smith today pledged to deliver “fair employment, fair taxes and fair funding”, as he revealed a manifesto of 20 policies. In a speech on the site of the old Orgreave coking plant in South Yorkshire, the leadership contender promised to ban zero hour contracts, repeal the Trade Union Act, build 1.5 million new homes and end the public sector pay freeze. Smith has criticised Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership for failing to bring forward policies, and aims to use today’s series […]

    Read more →
x

LabourList Daily Email

Everything Labour. Every weekday morning

Share with your friends










Submit