OVAM censors litter datasets because "we are ahead of elections"

This is stated in a response from an OVAM department head to an official request from the environmental organisation Recycling Netwerk Benelux for the datasets behind two OVAM reports.

See also the live debate in the Flemish Parliament on Wednesday 3 October after 15:30 on https://www.vlaamsparlement.be/plenaire-vergaderingen/1274143#video

The Decree on Public Access to Government Information provides for transparency regarding data held by public authorities. Citizens have the right to know which administrative documents governments possess. This is laid down in law and governments must respect the law.

“That a public administration decides not to grant this transparency because “we are 14 days away from local elections” is remarkable. That there are certain periods in which transparency is suspended is not what you expect in a 21st-century democracy”, says Recycling Netwerk. “It is the right of taxpayers to know what is happening to their tax money in the fight against litter, and what the differences are between Flemish municipalities.”

Read also the article on Apache.be: OVAM keeps 'politically sensitive' information about litter secret

Chronology

On 8 August, Recycling Netwerk requested information from OVAM based on the Decree on Public Access to Government Information. The environmental organisation requested insight into the datasets that formed the basis of two studies, the "Study into the quantities and policy costs of litter in Flanders – Theoretical model, cluster analysis, sample" conducted by IDEA Consult and the "Biennial litter study. Methodological report" conducted by KplusV.

Although OVAM surveyed the municipalities individually, the published version of the reports only provided figures aggregated by category of municipality.

“In order to be able to assess which litter policy works best, it is necessary to be able to compare the data of the respective municipalities. For example, a municipality with an effective litter policy and good results can serve as a best practice example for municipalities that find it difficult to get litter under control. There are also all kinds of factors that lead to litter, such as the socio-demographic composition of a municipality or the number of tourists a municipality attracts. Scientists might be able to draw very interesting conclusions from the data, but then OVAM must allow access to it”, explains director Rob Buurman.

OVAM first dragged its feet for a few weeks, until 24 August, and then postponed its answer with the following reasoning: “due to the nature of your questions, the level of detail and because the decision following a request under public access to government information must be confirmed by the Board of Directors of OVAM. The next Board of Directors meeting (after receipt of your request) is not until the end of August.”

On 24 September, 47 days after the request for information, OVAM sent a short reply with two Excel documents attached. Recycling Netwerk had explicitly asked for the answers from the respective municipalities used for the two OVAM studies on the amount and costs of litter. But nowhere in the Excel sheets can it be deduced what the individual municipalities answered. On 27 September, Recycling Netwerk repeated its request to receive the litter data per municipality.

Strange reasoning

On 28 September, an official response was received from OVAM containing some strange passages:

“4. In view of the sensitivity of the issue of litter and the fact that we are 14 days away from local elections and the data is not necessary to construct the report,

5. In view of the fact that if the names of the municipalities are made known to you, you will have information that could influence these elections, for example by questioning the policy of certain coalitions/administrations or by publishing these figures individually, which could cause harm;

these are additional arguments not to agree to your request, based on Article 15, § 1, 9° of the Decree of 26 March 2004 on Public Access to Government Information, namely the confidentiality of the actions of an environmental authority, in so far as that confidentiality is necessary for the performance of administrative enforcement, the conduct of an internal audit or political decision-making.”

Reaction of Recycling Netwerk

Recycling Netwerk responds: “OVAM’s labelling of the litter issue as ‘sensitive’ mainly indicates that the topic is alive among citizens. But these are not state secrets. It is about bottles, cans, papers and other litter that is found and cleaned up in Flemish municipalities. Citizens find it important that litter decreases, and that is precisely why it is reprehensible that OVAM does not wish to provide the data.”

“Of course we are appealing against this

This is stated in a response from an OVAM department head to an official request from environmental organisation Recycling Netwerk Benelux for the datasets behind two OVAM reports.

See also the live debate in the Flemish Parliament on Wednesday 3 October after 15:30 on https://www.vlaamsparlement.be/plenaire-vergaderingen/1274143#video

The Decree on Public Access to Government Information provides for transparency regarding data held by public authorities. Citizens have the right to know which administrative documents governments possess. This is laid down in law and governments must respect the law.

“That a public administration decides not to grant this transparency because “we are 14 days away from local elections” is remarkable. That there are certain periods in which transparency is suspended is not what you expect in a 21st-century democracy”, says Recycling Netwerk. “It is the right of taxpayers to know what is happening to their tax money in the fight against litter, and what the differences are between Flemish municipalities.”

Read also the article on Apache.be: OVAM keeps 'politically sensitive' information about litter secret

Chronology

On 8 August, Recycling Netwerk requested information from OVAM based on the Decree on Public Access to Government Information. The environmental organisation requested insight into the datasets that formed the basis of two studies, the "Study into the quantities and policy costs of litter in Flanders – Theoretical model, cluster analysis, sample" conducted by IDEA Consult and the "Biennial litter study. Methodological report" conducted by KplusV.

Although OVAM surveyed the municipalities individually, the published version of the reports only provided figures aggregated by category of municipalities.

“In order to be able to assess which litter policy works best, it is necessary to be able to compare the data of the respective municipalities. For example, a municipality with an effective litter policy and good results can serve as a best practice example for municipalities that find it difficult to get litter under control. There are also all kinds of factors that lead to litter, such as the socio-demographic composition of a municipality or the number of tourists a municipality attracts. Scientists might be able to draw very interesting conclusions from the data, but then OVAM must allow access to it”, explains director Rob Buurman.

OVAM first dragged its feet for a few weeks, until 24 August, and then postponed its answer with the following reasoning: “due to the nature of your questions, the level of detail and because the decision following a request under public access to government information must be confirmed by the Board of Directors of OVAM. The next Board of Directors meeting (after receipt of your request) is not until the end of August.”

On 24 September, 47 days after the request for information, OVAM sent a short reply with two Excel documents attached. Recycling Netwerk had explicitly asked for the answers from the respective municipalities used for the two OVAM studies on the amount and costs of litter. But nowhere in the Excel sheets can it be deduced what the individual municipalities answered. On 27 September, Recycling Netwerk repeated its request to receive the litter data per municipality.

Strange reasoning

On 28 September, an official response was received from OVAM containing some strange passages:

“4. In view of the sensitivity of the issue of litter and the fact that we are 14 days away from local elections and the data is not necessary to construct the report,

5. In view of the fact that if the names of the municipalities are made known to you, you will have information that could influence these elections, for example by questioning the policy of certain coalitions/administrations or by publishing these figures individually, which could cause harm;

these are additional arguments not to agree to your request, based on Article 15, § 1, 9° of the Decree of 26 March 2004 on Public Access to Government Information, namely the confidentiality of the actions of an environmental authority, in so far as that confidentiality is necessary for the performance of administrative enforcement, the conduct of an internal audit or political decision-making.”

Reaction of Recycling Netwerk

Recycling Netwerk responds: “OVAM’s labelling of the litter issue as ‘sensitive’ mainly indicates that the topic is alive among citizens. But these are not state secrets. It is about bottles, cans, papers and other litter that is found and cleaned up in Flemish municipalities. Citizens find it important that litter decreases, and that is precisely why it is reprehensible that OVAM does not wish to provide the data.”

“Of course we are appealing against this decision because it is unlawful. A government organisation that starts playing politics itself: we find that a very strange state of affairs. And even more than usual, transparency from governments is important, especially during elections. The government must be accountable, but if that same government decides to keep even the most basic information secret, then there is a major problem”, responds Recycling Netwerk.

Recycling Netwerk concludes with mild sarcasm: “Apparently, OVAM thinks it is normal to determine what information may and may not be disclosed before the elections. A voter might get the crazy idea to let their voting behaviour be influenced by whether or not there is an effective litter policy in their municipality. Apparently, according to OVAM, that is not possible in a democracy.”

Read also: Marc Reynebeau in De Standaard: “What the elections are not about“