Sir John Bourn, head of the National Audit Office, announced today that he will be stepping down from his post next year. He had been in the position for 20 years but came under fire for his extravagant use of taxpayer-funded expenses.

While the official word is that he is retiring to avoid any conflict with his post as chairman of the Professional Oversight Board, it is clear that pressure was mounting for him to leave after a steady stream of freedom of information requests laid bare his jet-setting lifestyle. From costly lunches at some of London’s best restaurants to first class air fare for him and his wife Lady Bourne, the Auditor General racked up £336,000 on 45 journeys in just a three-year period. Lady Bourn had gone with him on 24 of those occasions, which cost taxpayers £76,000.

Sir John Bourn’s recent trips

* accompanied by Lady Bourn
Source: National Audit Office

While the BBC and many newspapers reported on the final expenses disclosure, it was the tenacious Richard Brooks writing for Private Eye magazine who investigated the issue for months before the National Audit Office finally agreed to provide him with the information he sought.

* This is the first resignation in Whitehall to come as a result of FOIA disclosure. In Scotland, MSP David McLetchie resigned after FOI requests in 2005 revealed his detailed travel expense claims.

The Government announced today that it will not push through its proposed changes to the FOI charging regulations. The Constitutional Affairs Committee sent out a press release this afternoon:

GOVERNMENT’S CLIMB-DOWN ON FOI FEES IS THE ONLY RIGHT MOVE, SAYS COMMITTEE

The Government today at 1230pm publishes its response to the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee report on proposed changes to the fees charged to people and organizations seeking information under Freedom of Information legislation. The response is being published to coincide with a Government announcement on a “change in culture to make Government more open”.

Commenting on the Government’s response, Chairman of the Committee Rt Hon Alan Beith MP said: “Obviously we greatly welcome the fact that the Government has seen sense and accepted our position – and that of the many people and organisations who have made good use of freer access to information – and not changed the charging regime as they had planned. To go ahead with their proposed changes would have been a great mistake – as the expression goes; it wasn’t broke, don’t fix it.

“We are however disappointed that they have largely ignored our point about independently funding the Office of the Information Commissioner – can it be appropriate for the Ministry of Justice to set the funding levels for the independent regulator and thereby directly influence its capacity to investigate complaints? The Commissioner would be in a far stronger position if he became an Officer of Parliament, like the Ombudsman. I am sure that Parliament will want to return to the issue of independence.”

The Government’s response is published as a command paper that is part of a new consultation to make government more open (I’ll believe it when I see it). The policy paper is available on the Ministry of Justice website.
You can download the Committee’s first and follow-up reports on FOI .

An interesting study by Reporters Without Borders places the UK 24th in a league table of press freedom. To be honest it seems rather high knowing how many pitfalls stand in the way of getting investigations into the public domain in this country. Libel laws, contempt of court, the Official Secrets Act and the lack of protection for whistleblowers would all seem to make the UK even worse for press freedom than this study indicates. However, at least journalists aren’t killed, which is the frightening reality for many reporters working in other countries.

UK ranked 24th for press freedom
Tuesday October 16, 2007
MediaGuardian.co.uk

Britain has been outranked by more than 20 countries including Estonia, Portugal and Trinidad and Tobago in a survey of press freedom around the world.

The UK was rated 24th in an index of 169 countries published today by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which examined various factors such as the way journalists are treated, freedom of speech, freedom of information and diversity of media ownership.

Read the full article here.