Page 2596 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 24 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would be delighted, Mr Humphries, if you wish me to, to make a decision that there is to be full, free and unfettered access to all documents in relation to the Cabinet activities of the Alliance Government, because I am sure that they would be interesting reading. Of course, it is not appropriate for me to make a decision in relation to your documents.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! Minister, your time has expired.
MR CORNWELL (4.29): Madam Speaker, I think it is timely to remind members of the topic of the MPI, and that is:
The Government's failure to provide adequate access to information to ensure that government is accountable.
It is not a debate on freedom of information, although Mrs Carnell quite properly has adverted in detail to the question of FOI because it is a serious aspect of this question of information from the Government. However, it is not a unique example. I would like, therefore, to concentrate on a remark that Mr Connolly made in passing, earlier in this debate, that we in the Opposition have the opportunity of questions on notice to obtain information. That is very interesting. The problems with questions on notice fall into three categories. The first is the excuse of resource implications; the second is the question of privacy; and the third is the question of public interest. I would like to devote a little time to each one.
I refer first to resource implications. I have here one of my many questions, question No. 227. In relation to supported accommodation properties owned by the Housing Trust, I had the temerity to ask what was the purchase price of each property. This answer came back:
This information is not readily available. I am not prepared to divert the considerable resources necessary to compile this information.
Madam Speaker, I would think that that is a fairly fundamental request. All I wanted to know was the purchase price of each of the supported accommodation properties owned by the Housing Trust. The reply was:
I am not prepared to divert the considerable resources necessary to compile this information.
Maybe they do not know how much their properties cost, but that is an outrageous reply. It shows gross incompetence.
Ms Follett: But you keep running to the media with refuge addresses. That is probably why.
MR CORNWELL: No; you did not listen, Chief Minister. I did not seek an address. I simply wanted to know the purchase price of each property. But, "No, we are not prepared to provide that information". How about this question in relation to privacy? In question No. 802 I asked whether section 6, block 4, Ainslie, had been purchased by a group or cooperative, and, if so, what was the name of this group or cooperative. The reply was:
Because all tenants and residents in the ACT have the right of confidentiality, the name of the organisation will not be revealed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .