From 2026, an Isle of Man public authority's freedom of information performance is a published number. On 13 April 2026 the Isle of Man Information Commissioner announced that the Isle of Man Government "is to publish detailed quarterly statistics on Freedom of Information (FoI) activity", compiled by the Office of Cyber Security and Information Assurance and updated every quarter on a rolling 12-month basis. The same year, the Commissioner's Annual Report 2025/26 recorded 16 FOI decision notices, "nearly double previous years". So the question facing a department, board, office or local authority is no longer whether anyone is counting. Someone is, on a fixed cycle, in public. What follows is what changed, what the figures show, what the decision notices were about, and what a defensible FOI function looks like under the Freedom of Information Act 2015.
What changed in April 2026
The "Office of Cyber Security and Information Assurance (OCSIA) will compile the quarterly, anonymised FoI statistics which will be published on the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) website". The Island's office abbreviates itself ICO, but it is the Island's own regulator under its own statute, not the United Kingdom body sharing those initials.
The publication gives "a rolling 12-month overview" that does not reset with the financial year: a weak quarter stays in the published picture for four more, next to every other department's. The Commissioner will also offer "a training session for the public sector on FoI handling".
Information Commissioner Alexandra Delaney-Bhattacharya said that "Transparency fosters trust and is central to the public's right to information". The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs, Jane Poole-Wilson MHK, said publicising the statistics "reflects our shared commitment to transparency, accountability, and strong information governance across the public sector". None of this changes what the Freedom of Information Act 2015 requires, only who can see how well the duty is met, which is why the governance failures behind recent Isle of Man FOI decisions now carry a reputational cost too.
The numbers that now exist
Freedom of Information Statistics Isle of Man — Q1 2026 Edition, published by the Commissioner's Office and OCSIA, covers "the rolling 12-month period ending 30 June 2026", with figures stated as at 1 July 2026.
| Measure | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| FOIs received, 2023 / 2024 / 2025 | 1,075 / 987 / 988 | Q1 2026 Edition |
| FOIs received in 2026 so far | 559, as of 1 July 2026 | Q1 2026 Edition |
| Busiest month of the last twelve | June 2026, 117 | Q1 2026 Edition |
| Bodies covered | Excludes local authorities and publicly owned companies | Q1 2026 Edition |
| FOI decision notices issued | 16, "nearly double previous years" | Annual Report 2025/26 |
| Oldest open case | Just over six months, down from more than 11 months | Annual Report 2025/26 |
Volumes rose from 828 in 2021 to 1,075 in 2023, then settled. The last twelve months run between 72 and 117 requests a month and end on the highest single month in the series, June 2026. One month is one month; what the series shows is that the load is not falling.
Two limits matter more than any single figure. "Sections 1-5 do not include local authorities and publicly owned companies", so a town or village authority's FOI performance is not in this picture at all, which is the strongest reason for a body outside that perimeter to hold its own numbers. And figures on cases published and responses delivered on time "will be published one quarter in arrears to ensure accuracy", so on-time performance always trails volume.
The Commissioner's Annual Report 2025/26, published on 8 July 2026, records a streamlined complaints system that reduced the oldest open case "to just over six months, down from more than 11 months the previous year", so an authority relying on elapsed time to soften a difficult decision now has half as much of it.
The same report shows workload rising across both regimes: 200 personal data breaches, up from 152, and data protection complaints more than doubling to 53 from 25, which is why data protection compliance on the Isle of Man belongs in the same conversation.
Knowing your own numbers, published or not, is a short exercise.
What the decision notices are actually about
The Commissioner's 2026 news index shows decision notices concerning the Treasury (June and August), the Department for Enterprise (April and July), Manx Care (March and May), Castletown Commissioners (May), Ramsey Town Commissioners (March), the Isle of Man Constabulary (April), the Department of Infrastructure (March and April), and a joint notice concerning the Cabinet Office and DEFA (March).
Where the subject is known, the pattern is consistent. Treasury was asked in August for the paper the Department for Enterprise submitted when requesting funding for a loan for King William's College, and in June for the rental eligibility criteria and allocation policies for the Former Nurses' Home. The Department for Enterprise was asked in July about Visit Isle of Man's structure, salary, board and appointment processes; Manx Care in May for a breakdown of the costs of leaflets and their distribution to Manx residents, which it refused to provide; Castletown Commissioners, in a request made in October 2025, for account information for the first two quarters of the financial year; and the Constabulary in April for information relating to complaints.
Set the outcomes aside. The subjects are consistent: spending, contracts, allocation policies, salaries and governance arrangements, which is how public money moves and how public decisions get made. They land on a central department and on a small town authority alike, and the small authority is the one whose figures the quarterly series does not carry.
The fees question is open, not settled
The Cabinet Office consulted on introducing fees and cost limits for FOI requests, with results updated on 10 September 2025 and feedback on 16 September. It drew 434 responses, including 20 organisations: five local authorities, ten government bodies including departments, boards and the Information Commissioner, the rest private organisations and one charity.
"The majority of responses strongly oppose the introduction of a fee for FOI requests, arguing that it would undermine transparency, restrict democratic accountability, and disproportionately impact those on lower incomes." Most favoured no fee at all, a smaller portion £1 to £5, fewer £25 to £50, and "only a very small number support high fees (£75 or more)".
Cost limits fared little better. "Over 65% of respondents disagreed with the proposal allowing public authorities to refuse requests that exceed 15 hours". Over 60% raised concerns about a lower cost limit for smaller authorities, highlighting the importance of consistency across all government bodies. Aggregating similar requests split respondents almost exactly, 49.8% in support against 50.2% opposed.
The Cabinet Office, for the Council of Ministers, said the input "will play a key role in shaping the next steps". Those steps have not been announced: fees have neither been introduced nor ruled out. Resourcing an FOI function on the expectation that a cost limit will arrive is planning around something that does not exist.
If your resourcing rests on that assumption, test it now.
What a defensible FOI function looks like
Start with your own numbers. An authority that cannot say how many requests it received last quarter, how many it answered within the twenty working days the Freedom of Information Act 2015 allows, and how many went to internal review is not in a position to explain any of them.
Record the reasoning when the decision is made, not when it is challenged. In our experience the file that fails rarely holds a weak argument; it holds no argument at all, reconstructed months later. What was searched, what was found, what was withheld and why, written at the time by the person who decided, is most of a defensible position, and our account of the recurring weaknesses behind refused FOI requests sets out what that record should contain.
Give it a named owner. FOI spread across whoever is available has no capacity plan and no consistency between responses. One person accountable for the log, the deadlines and the reasoning survives leave and turnover.
Then treat the twenty-working-day period as a process rather than an aspiration. A response that goes out on day nineteen because somebody chased it will go out late in the month the chaser is away.
Common mistakes we see
The first is assuming that exclusion from the published series means exclusion from scrutiny. Castletown Commissioners and Ramsey Town Commissioners both drew decision notices this year, and OCSIA compiling the figures does not move the performance behind them off the authority.
The second is running FOI and data protection as separate functions. Redactions, third-party personal data and requests that are really subject access in another form sit on the seam between them.
Frequently asked questions
Where are the quarterly FOI statistics published, and who do they cover?
On the Isle of Man Information Commissioner's website, compiled with OCSIA and updated each quarter. Sections 1-5 exclude local authorities and publicly owned companies.
Are FOI fees or cost limits being introduced on the Isle of Man?
Not as things stand. The Cabinet Office consulted on both and said the input "will play a key role in shaping the next steps". Nothing further has been announced: fees have neither been introduced nor ruled out.
Is the Isle of Man Information Commissioner the same as the UK ICO?
No. The Island has its own Commissioner, currently Alexandra Delaney-Bhattacharya, and its own statute, the Freedom of Information Act 2015. Its office abbreviates itself ICO, but the United Kingdom regulator has no jurisdiction here.
How many FOI requests does Isle of Man Government receive?
988 in 2025, close to 987 in 2024 and 1,075 in 2023, with 559 recorded by 1 July 2026. Those totals cover departments, boards and offices, not local authorities.
We help Isle of Man public authorities build that baseline, inside the published perimeter and outside it.
A published number is not a judgement on your authority; it is only the end of the period in which nobody outside it had to know.
