The Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine (DAFM) and Coillte have come under fire in a new report published today (Wednesday, May 24) for failing to provide forestry information to the public.
In its annual review published today, the Office of the Commissioner for Environmental Information (OCEI) warned that authorities have a duty to provide information on the environment.
But in the review, the Commissioner for Environmental Information, Ger Deering, criticised some authorities for failing to meet these obligations – including DAFM and Coillte.
According to Deering, his office received a record number of appeals from individuals who were denied environmental information compared to the number of appeals received in 2021.
Deering said: “The purpose of the Access to Information on the Environment (AIE) Regulations and regime is to enable members of the public to know and understand what is happening
in the environment around them.
“Timely and easy access to environmental information is essential to assist the public to participate in environmental decision-making in an informed manner.”
The commissioner received 369 cases last year – an increase of 151% on 2021.
Last year his office also completed the highest number of cases in its history – 227, up from 83 in 2021.
The annual review shows that more than 69% of appeals to the commissioner – 257 in 2022 – related to forestry information.
According to the OCEI these cases mainly involved Coillte and DAFM.
In 90 cases, Coillte failed to give a decision on time at the ‘initial decision’ stage, and in 88 cases at the ‘internal review’ stage.
Specifically in relation to Coillte the OCEI said that “months of correspondence” between the commissioner’s office and Coillte “was required to establish if Coillte carried out the appropriate searches in response to a request under the Access to Information on the Environment regulations”.
The commissioner stated that if Coillte had supplied the relevant information when it was first requested by his office, his review would have been far more efficient and cost-effective for all parties.
The annual review also shows that DAFM failed to issue a decision within the statutory time limit in 26 cases at the ‘initial stage’, and 37 at ‘internal review’ stage.