|
Clause 30
Inspection of documents and questions at audit
Mr. Wiggin: I beg to move amendment No. 32, in page 22, line 4, leave out 'an interested' and insert 'a'.
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment No. 33, in clause 30, page 22, line 19, leave out 'means' and insert
'includes but is not limited to'.
Mr. Wiggin: The amendments deal with inspection rights during audits of local government bodies. Subsection (1) allows the accounts that are to be audited to be inspected by ''an interested person''. Amendment No. 32 proposes the replacement of that phrase with ''a person'' to find out what the Government mean by ''an interested person''. Clause 30 sets out the fact that the rights of information and documents do not apply to personal information, which is defined restrictively in subsection (4). Amendment No. 33 would widen the definition of personal information from just the fact that the person is employed and/or paid by the body.
I want to probe whether the clause has been drafted adequately to set out clearly what information people are restricted to obtaining. It is also interesting that the Bill makes no reference to the Data Protection Act
Column Number: 37
1998, which presumably covers all rights to information. Will the Minister explain why the clause has been so drafted?
Mr. Touhig: Amendment No. 32 would widen the scope of the category of person entitled to inspect or copy the accounts and related documents of a local government body. If the amendment were to be accepted, a person would not need to be interested in the sense of having a practical interest in the accounts or affairs of the body concerned—for example, he would not have to be a local taxpayer, a resident or a person with a commercial interest in the affairs of the body audited. A body would have to accommodate anyone who wished to inspect and take copies.
The clause enables interested persons to inspect or make copies of documents relating to the accounts at an audit or of a local government body. It also gives a local government elector or his representative the right to question the auditor about the accounts. In practice, the reference to an interested person is very unlikely to represent a practical impediment to a person wishing to exercise a reasonable right of inspection. The terminology, however, entitles a local government body or auditor to resist any vexatious or frivolous requests.
Amendment No. 33 would widen the definition of personal information that a person is not entitled to obtain through inspection of the accounts or related documents, or questions to an auditor. The amendment is ambiguous, as, unlike the clause, it does not clarify or define the limits of what constitutes personal information; it could lead to confusion and misunderstanding. Much of what a lay person would consider personal information is protected by the Data Protection Act. Additional protection by third parties is not necessary in the context of the Bill.
I hope that the hon. Gentleman finds my response helpful and that he will consider withdrawing the amendment.
Mr. Wiggin: I always find the Minister's responses helpful, and that is especially so of the second part. I agree that my amendment may not necessarily involve the best possible drafting, but the situation is unusual and I would have thought that the Data Protection Act offered such protection.
Column Number: 38
The only question on which I want to press the Minister is that of ''an interested person''. The first people who spring to mind are journalists and those in the media. They may be fascinated by the matter, but they may not qualify as ''an interested person''. I am surprised that he will not accept my amendment, as I am often told that transparency is the key thing that we should seek in legislation. However, his point about vexatious, difficult and perhaps even frivolous requests is important, particularly as those are increasing in modern life. I would be grateful if he clarified the status of the media in this respect.
Mr. Touhig: Many of us are subject to frivolous requests from time to time. Someone whom I do not know, and who is not one of my constituents, comes to the House every other year. He puts in a green card, giving the reason for his visit as ''tea''. There we are—we get some odd requests.
Mr. Wiggin: I get the same request from my dad.
Mr. Touhig: The hon. Gentleman is concerned with what is meant by ''an interested person''. There have been only a handful of cases dealing with that meaning. A recent High Court case confirmed that the motive of the person seeking the information is irrelevant. That is important. The media are not considered interested by virtue of their being media, which was also confirmed in a recent case. That High Court indication is a significant contribution to the wider debate.
Mr. Wiggin: I expect we will read in the newspaper I quoted earlier that that means that the media are banned from finding out what local authorities are doing. I take the Minister's serious point; he has clarified who could and could not see the accounts. I am sure that the media will be able to find an elector to help them, so they will not be blocked, but it is important to clarify the situation at this stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Column Number: 39
The following Members attended the Committee:
Griffths, Mr. Win (Chairman)
Ainger, Mr.
Francis, Dr.
Havard, Mr.
Lucas, Ian
Organ, Diana
Ruane, Chris
Sheridan, Jim
Swire, Mr.
Tami, Mark
Touhig, Mr.
Wiggin, Mr.
Williams, Hywel
Williams, Mr. Roger
|
