| |
VK5QX > INFO 25.01.04 21:42l 121 Lines 4414 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 7E0792VK5QX
Read: DB0FHN GUEST
Subj: Re: Freedom of Information Act
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<OK0PKL<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<VK6HGR<VK5UJ<VK5BRC<
VK5SPG<VK5TTY<VK5LZ
Sent: 040123/0622Z @:VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC #:12109 [Elizabeth] $:7E0792VK5QX
From: VK5QX@VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
To : INFO@WW
SOME DIFFERENCES, (But Not Personal.)
David G4EBT provided some interesting insights when commenting on the U.K.
Freedom of Information Act (FOI) which I understand comes into force in
January 2005.
In his bulletin, replying to comments from me, he provided the following:-
__________
" You can't ask for just anything - this Act is about access to info that
might be held on each of us as individuals, and complements the Data
Protection Act 1998 (http://www.dpr.gov.uk) which requires that:
*Info held on an individual is released to them on request,
*Records are accurate,
*Info is only used for the purpose for which it is intended, and;
*The individual's privacy is protected."
__________
It is interesting to note that, according to the description given, the
U.K. FOI Act APPARENTLY pertains only to matters involving the individual.
In this way it would seem to be rather different to the FOI Act as exists
in Australia.
In a previous bulletin I made comments, including the following:-
__________
> Yes! You can have a copy of a document, but much, or most, of what is
> contained in the document may well be obliterated.
> There have been many instances where interested parties have fought
> strongly, using legal means, so as to have information released.
> 1. The authorities can block release of information without too much
> trouble.
> 2. They can make it so darned difficult with continuing obstruction . . .
> 3. The processes can become so lengthy, and associated legal action and
> resultant costs so expensive, that you cannot afford to continue your
> pursuit of the issue(s).
__________
So as to set the record straight I point out that my original remarks were
made bearing in mind the difference just explained above.
Here we encounter quite a few occasions where major exercises are
conducted along these lines involving such organisations as political
bodies, Trade Unions and other various groups usually wanting to push an
issue specific to their particular interests.
Hence, my remarks about legal actions and associated high costs incurred.
Often such cases become extremely involved and complicated and in such
instances the relevant government or government authority may be doing its
best to protect its own interests.
This therefore no doubt puts a somewhat different light on the subject
when compared with the situation as it may exist in the U.K. and as
described by David G4EBT regarding his efforts.
This can be indicated by the following exchange:-
I said, " There have been many instances where interested parties have
fought strongly, using legal means, so as to have information released. "
and
" The processes can become so lengthy, and associated legal action and
resultant costs so expensive, that you cannot afford to continue your
pursuit of the issue(s). "
To which David replied, " You don't need a lawyer to use "legal means" -
just some books, internet, half a ream of paper, and an ink cartridge. It
isn't easy - they're professionals paid out of our pockets - we're
amateurs. "
and
" Amateur radio is about the spirit of lifelong learning, homebrew,
innovation - all that stuff. Why get a lawyer - do it yourself
with homespun wisdom! "
David went on to explain how he was able to obtain information of interest
to him by being persistent in his cause. He also was able to show the
benefit obtained by his efforts, not however achieved without quite a
struggle.
There is no doubt in my mind that he is to be commended for the obviously
patient and effective way he went about to obtain a desired result.
This bulletin of mine is intended solely to highlight a subtle difference
in circumstances where a case may involve personal matters as against one
where battles are being fought, often based on social principles and
political affiliations etc.
These can become so complicated that probably only a highly skilled lawyer
could unravel some of the arguments. It would seem that sometimes
batteries of such "gentlemen" are lined up against each other in defence
of the separate causes being pursued.
(Comment could be made regarding economies of scale were things to be made
a deal simpler.)
Like David, I " Hope at least some of these ramblings are of interest. "
Regards,
Ian
__________
73 de Ian, VK5QX
@ VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
23 January 2004
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
