The F.O.I. Cut
The Freedom of Information cut lowers the cost threshold for processing requests. Fewer will be answered as "too expensive".
Dispatch #88 — The F.O.I. Cut
The government is proposing to make it harder to find out what it's doing.
Not to improve the service. Not to process requests faster. Just to raise the barrier to transparency — the price of asking what the state is doing — higher. This is the Freedom of Information cut.
## The Right to Know
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, people have a right to access information held by public authorities [6]. This includes government departments, local councils, NHS trusts, schools, and hundreds of other public bodies [6]. The principle is straightforward: the state works for the public. The public has a right to see what it's doing.
But that right comes with conditions. One of them is cost.
## The Mechanism
Public authorities are not required to answer every request unlimited by resources. The Act allows them to refuse requests estimated to exceed a certain cost threshold [3]. The logic is pragmatic — if a request would require an unreasonable amount of staff time to fulfill, the public authority can decline it.
Here's how it works: authorities cannot normally charge for staff time unless other relevant legislation authorises this [2]. However, if the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit, they can refuse it under section 12 of the Act [3]. The limit acts as a gate. The lower the threshold, the more requests fall above it. The more requests refused, the less information released.
## The Proposal
UK news publishers have warned the Government against "extremely concerning" proposals to reduce the cost ceiling for processing Freedom of Information requests [1]. The News Media Association, representing national and regional news businesses, has requested clarity from the Government on its intentions following Financial Times reporting that restrictions on FOI requests are being considered [1].
The current cost ceiling is set at £600 — equivalent to 24 hours of work at £25 per hour [4]. The argument, on its face, is about efficiency. Whitehall is under pressure. FOI requests take time. Time costs money. Lower the threshold, fewer requests need to be answered.
But there is a problem with this argument.
## The Gap
Even if a request is refused as too expensive, the body still has to assess it, estimate the cost, and issue a refusal notice [3]. The work does not vanish. What changes is the outcome: fewer requests fulfilled, more requests refused, more information that stays hidden.
The beneficiaries of a lower threshold are not the public. They are the public authorities who prefer that certain questions go unanswered. When the cost of asking rises, only those with the resources to pay — large news organisations, well-funded campaign groups — can afford to pursue answers. Everyone else is priced out.
That's not efficiency. That's a quiet restructuring of who gets to hold power to account.
Question: Why is transparency becoming something the government tries to make expensive?
[1] Publishers warn reduced FOI cost limit would put public-interest information 'beyond scrutiny'. Press Gazette. https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/foi-changes-cost-publishers-public-interest/
[2] Charging a fee and cost limits. ICO. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/foi/guide-to-managing-an-foi-request/charging-a-fee-and-cost-limits/
[3] Requests where the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit (section 12). ICO. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/foi/freedom-of-information-and-environmental-information-regulations/section-12-requests-where-the-cost-of-compliance-exceeds-the-appropriate-limit/
[4] What might it cost?. Scottish Information Commissioner. https://www.foi.scot/what-might-it-cost
[6] How to make a freedom of information (FOI) request: Overview. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/make-a-freedom-of-information-request
Morgan Hale is independent verification without the editorial filter. Every cut is evidenced. Every question is open. Because it matters.