Anita Maidment and Jane Steele, Policy Studies Institute
Key Findings
- The research identifies two different, but related, information activities undertaken by local authorities: the provision of information about the actions of and services provided by authorities; and encouragement of public awareness of the decision-making process of local government, through mechanisms that meet or go beyond the provisions of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act, 1985. These two types of activity are often approached in different ways by authorities.
- Local authorities are complying with the provisions of the 1985 Act and four fifths reported activities that go beyond the requirements of the legislation
- Certain of the press and public have responded by exercising their rights under the Act. The average attendance at full council meetings was reported to be greater than 10 members of the public by over a third of authorities surveyed.
- There is variation in attendance levels at committee meetings across local authorities and the other public bodies covered by the legislation. This variation can be explained in part by the extent to which authorities have made efforts to positively encourage public participation and access to information.
- Authorities have incurred few additional costs as a result of the Act.
- The Act appears to ensure a basic level of provision of information about the decision making process within local government, but it is the steps authorities have taken that go beyond these measures which have been most effective in maximising public awareness of this process.
Introduction
The Local Government (Access to Information) Act, 1985 provided the public and elected members with new rights of access to information about the policies and practices of local authorities. It also opened up meetings to the public and to the press. The passage of the Act reflected an increasing demand for information, coupled with concerns about its accessibility; and acknowledged a developing role for local authorities as providers of public information.
This summary describes the interim findings of the postal survey element of a research project commissioned by the Department of the Environment and carried out by the Policy Studies Institute. The project has been overseen by a steering group which included representatives of the local authority associations. The overall aim was to evaluate the impact of the Act by considering its operation in practice; its value to the public, the press and elected members; and its influence on the work of local authorities and other public bodies covered by the legislation.
The study was undertaken in two main stages: a postal survey of all local authorities and other bodies covered by the Act in England; and case-studies among 12 local authorities of different types. Both the postal questionnaire and the case-studies paid special attention to the provision of information about planning policies and decisions. This local authority function was singled out as it is one in which members of the public have most interest and are encouraged to become involved. It was therefore of interest to assess the extent to which their involvement is facilitated, or otherwise, by access to information about planning policy and applications.
Postal Survey
A postal questionnaire was sent to all local authorities and other public bodies within scope of the legislation - such as fire and police authorities - in April 1994. The response to the survey was very good. 404 local authorities were surveyed and 85 per cent responded, with an even spread across authority type and political control. A response rate of 85% was also achieved for the other public bodies.
The questionnaire covered the take-up of rights to information by the press and public; and the authorities' overall approach to public information, information management and to open government.
Approach to Information Provision
Anecdotal evidence suggests that local authorities have become much more active managers and providers of information over the past decade. Key catalysts in this process include the recent legislation and a generally greater awareness of the importance of users' rights and customer service - as exemplified by the Citizen's Charters. This provided the broad context for a detailed look at provision of information under the Local Government (Access to Information) Act, 1985.
Nearly half the authorities in the survey had published a formal information policy to codify their approach to information provision. Such policies were most common among authorities controlled by Liberal Democrats, and in London boroughs and counties.
Just under half of the authorities reported that they had a central information unit. Such departments were most common in the authorities that had adopted a formal information policy. The main function of these central units was in the actual provision of information to the public, although this could also be complemented by dissemination at a more devolved level. In most authorities, however, responsibility for disseminating information was widely dispersed to service departments and to one-stop shops and neighbourhood offices, with no central provision.
Printed information - usually in the form of leaflets - was the most common means of disseminating information. Three-quarters of the authorities also published a council newspaper and nearly all produced an annual report.
The data did not reveal a strong relationship between an authority's efforts to provide information about services and its approach to encouraging public access to information about policies and decision making.
Implementing the Act
The preliminary analysis of the postal survey results showed authorities to be varied in their approach to the Act. While all authorities appeared to be meeting the minimum statutory requirements, many did more than was actually determined by law and over one third exceeded the legal requirements considerably.
Most authorities had taken some steps to ensure that the public were aware of their rights to information under the Act. About half took a passive approach, publicising rights of access through posters and notices in council offices and on agendas and committee papers. But many authorities took a more active stance by additionally publicising rights in libraries, newspapers and other public places. Most authorities maintained mailing lists of individuals and organisations wanting to receive committee papers.
Reports and agendas and minutes of meetings were the most frequently accessible class of committee paper - more than two thirds of authorities, for example, deposited copies in public libraries. Background papers were less readily available.
The Act defines two types of sensitive information - confidential and exempt - for which there is provision for rights of access to be suspended. In practice such suspension of rights is relatively rare. Fewer than half of the authorities had more than 50 instances of sensitive information in the course of the year, although the proportion was greater in the larger authorities. There was no evidence of significant variations in authorities' interpretations of when they may or may not withdraw rights of access to information.
Take-up
The survey suggests that some people are exercising their rights to information under the Act. Over one third of authorities reported average attendances in excess of ten people at council meetings - only one in ten London Boroughs had, on average, fewer than ten people attending their council meetings. There was some evidence to suggest that attendances were higher in authorities that actively publicised rights under the Act.
Attendances at meetings of planning committees - a special focus for the project - was considerably higher than at full council meetings. About twice as many authorities reported average attendances in excess of 10 people at planning meetings than at full council meetings. By contrast, far fewer people took up their rights of access to documents. Most authorities reported that they rarely or never received requests for background papers.
Resources
Nine out of ten authorities reported that they had incurred no significant extra costs as a result of the Act. Twelve per cent, however, reported that they spent considerable staff time on maintaining the records required by the Act. Those authorities exceeding their formal requirements under the Act were least likely to report that they had incurred additional costs.
Other Bodies Covered by the Act
In addition to local authorities, the Act applies to: police, passenger transport, fire and civil defence, waste regulation and disposal authorities and to two of the national parks and the Broads Authority.
These authorities generally did less to publicise people's rights of access to information than did local authorities. They also did less to encourage take-up of the rights. Perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, attendance at their meetings and interest in their documents was notably less.
Two thirds of these other bodies felt that the Act had resulted in significant resource implications both in terms of costs and staff time - a much higher proportion than for local authorities. A possible explanation for this difference in perceptions of the impact of the Act is that many of the 'other bodies' were brought into existence at about the same time as the Act, and were therefore setting up systems for the first time.
'Public access to information about local government: preliminary postal survey findings' by Anita Maidment and Jane Steele, Policy Studies Institute is an unpublished document providing a full account of the findings of the of the postal survey element of a larger-scale project to evaluate the Access to Information Act 1985. This is available from the DTLR Local Government Research Unit without charge.
For further information on the research contact:
Paul McCafferty, Local Government Research Unit, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
Telephone: 0171 890 4103. Fax: 0171 890 4099. E-mail: lg3.doe@dial.pipex.com
Jane Steele, Policy Studies Institute, 100 Park Village East, London NW1 3SR
Telephone: 0171 337 2171.
Published in January 1995
Return to Best Value Research
Return to Beacon Council Research
Return to Local Government Research Unit Index
Return to Local Government Finance Index
Return to Best Value Index
Return to Local Government and the Regions Index
Return to DTLR Home Page
DTLR Web Site Terms