Skip to main content

Day: 15 January 2016

Defend the Freedom of Information Act at universities

Freedom is information. When groups with power and influence have been shown time and time again to be willing to abuse said power and influence behind closed doors, how can we continue to trust them without some promise of it being brought to the surface?

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 gave us some semblance of an opportunity to hold public authorities, including Parliament, higher education institutions, and the police to account. Clearly, groups are well within their rights to withhold certain information, and they do—it is not possible to invoke FOI for government intelligence, and if collecting the data would take unreasonable effort, bodies can reject the request for information.

In fact, the ball is often in the requested body’s court to cover their own backs as it is a representative of their own who puts together the information, and so names are often redacted—as could be seen when the highest-paid HE employees were revealed by the TaxPayers’ Alliance last year, since many of the most hugely-paid were simply filed as “Unknown”.

Amid the marketisation of Higher Education, we are also now told that the increased influence of shareholders can be used as a reason to exempt an institution from requests for information. People deserve to be able to get their hands on this information about bodies that influence their lives—and do universities not affect the lives of the general public?

At the very least, there are millions of full- and part-time students whose lives are inextricably affected by the actions of universities, so can you deny that they have a right to be able to look into what their institution is doing?

This move will mean that student journalism will become exponentially more difficult, and even mainstream media will be severely hindered. Students, who are some of the most intelligent, creative and politically engaged in society will be left without an avenue to make a real impact on how their institutions work.

Consultation closes at 11:45 tonight, so it seems that our efforts to get universities to change their minds are very much in vain. On the other hand, we can’t let this direct attack on democracy and transparency pass unnoticed.

As Editor-in-chief of The Mancunion I fully stand by Hiran Adhia of The Boar and Connor Woodman of the Warwick Globalist, as well as the Student Publication Association, in condemning Warwick University’s and the Russell Group’s decision to support exempting universities from the Freedom of Information Act. There is a petition here that you can sign to back them too.

Leaked letter shows Warwick supports scrapping Freedom of Information

Student journalists at the University of Warwick have seen a leaked version of their university’s Green Paper consultation response, which appears to show the university supporting the move to exempt higher education institutions from the Freedom of Information Act, leading to serious concerns universities will increasingly act in the interests of corporate shareholders and not students.

In an article titled “LEAKED: Warwick wants to scrap Freedom of Information” published jointly in official newspaper The Boar and international relations magazine Warwick Globalist, it was revealed that on page 68 of the leaked response, the university states that, “in our view universities should not remain within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act.”

Its reasoning seems to be based in the interests of stakeholders, “given the diminishing contribution of the public purse to the sustainability of UKHEI [UK Higher Education Institutions].” Apparently, the heavier corporate involvement makes the right for the public to scrutinise what universities are doing “unclear.”

The continual commitment to stakeholders in the letter “provides more evidence that Warwick’s management are increasingly willing to sacrifice the needs of students to that of other corporate ‘stakeholders’,” say the writers of the article.

The ideas set out in the Green Paper, released in November 2015, appear to be intended to make the legal requirements of public institutions similar to those of less regulated private institutions taking an ever-greater role in HE, to create, according to the Paper, a “level playing field.” This, as well as proposals including that a single minister should be able to set tuition fee levels, has caused widespread outcry across HE institutions.

The Freedom of Information Act, passed in 2000, allows access to data in the public interest stored by public institutions. It has been used to break stories such as the expenses scandal, and on a more student- and Manchester-focussed level, revelations of how much investment the University of Manchester holds in fossil fuel companies. It stands as a bastion of transparency, allowing anyone to scrutinise the activities of many powerful groups which have an influence on public life.

Jo Johnson’s Green Paper includes the statement: “The cost to providers of being within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act is estimated at around £10m per year.

“In principle, we want to see all Higher Education providers subject to the same requirements, and wherever possible we are seeking to reduce burdens and deregulate. However, we may wish to consider some exceptions to this general rule if it were in the interest of students and the wider public.”

FOI itself is not without its problems, and the Editors-in-chief of the respective publications, who penned the piece, acknowledge that, if anything, the act should be stricter not more lenient.

“The Freedom of Information Act is by no means perfect; if anything, its remit over higher education ought to be strengthened, rather than eliminated. There are numerous exemptions which are liberally applied—the Times Higher Education Supplement found that only 35% of universities provided all the information they requested.”

Depsite this, they strongly call for the university to retract this support for an exemption from FOI. “To lose it would be an attack on basic democratic rights. Students have a legitimate right to access raw data and information on their university, to understand what decisions are being made—decisions which impact their lives significantly—and how they’re being taken.

“To deny all students, including student journalists, the opportunity to scrutinise and hold the university to account in this way, is to deny them access to the truth. This is something that we strongly condemn.”

However, the deadline for response submissions is today, Friday the 15th of January.

A spokesperson from the University of Warwick said, “the university, and indeed the Russell Group as a whole, has already expressed this view… on the inclusion of universities in the Freedom of Information legislation.

“We have reiterated our view in response to the recent BIS green paper on Higher Education. We are really why our student newspaper is using the word “leaked” in its headline as that Green Paper response is already public [sic]. We have already shared it with our Students’ Union and will be posting it on our web site in full very shortly.

“The reason for simply reiterating this view in our response to the Green Paper is because the Green Paper itself makes reference to possible creation of even more private Higher Education providers who would again be exempt from the FOI legislation.”

They also cite the responses by the Russell Group and Universities UK to consultations on Freedom of Information. The former reads, “[universities] are subject to numerous regulatory requirements on information reporting, including financial health reporting, publication of data on student satisfaction and graduate employment and publication of information on courses of study. The additional responsibilities created by FOI represent an unnecessary burden.”

UUK make a similar claim: “We are concerned that the burden imposed on universities under the Act is increasingly disproportionate to the public interest in the public’s need to know.”