The Justice Select Committee in its post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 noted that the "cost of administering the Act has been described as its "Archilles heel" but pointed out that the cost had to be weighed against the greater accountability which it brought. It also noted that the Act had brought about savings where requests "revealed erroneous public spending" and suggested that authorities would use resources accordingly knowing that they would be subject to more public scrutiny. Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides an exemption for a public authority from disclosure of information where the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit. Alternatively, a public authority may charge a fee, within the bounds of regulations, where the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit, although it was suggested in evidence to the Justice Select Committee that authorities did not routinely charge such fees. The current limits for dealing with requests free of charge are £600 for central government and £450 for other public authorities which equates to 24 and 18 hours respectively of staff time in dealing with requests. It should be noted that this only relates to determining whether the information is held, locating the information, retrieving and extracting it. It does not include time spent in reading material, considering exemptions or taking legal advice. The Justice Committee rejected ideas for other fee charging methodologies as either unworkable or risky in terms of undermining the objective of the Act of ensuring an equal right for everyone to access information. It did "recognise, however, that complying with its duties under the Act can be a significant cost to a public body" and recommended a reduction of the 18 hour limit to 16, leaving the details to the government to consider in more detail.