Page 2597 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 24 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I did not want to know by name the people who were living in the place. I certainly did not want to know of their relationship to each other. I just wanted to know the name of the organisation. But privacy prevents it from being put forward.
In question No. 679 I asked whether bed-sitter accommodation is allocated to single persons in Burnie Court, Lyons, and, if so, how the Minister could justify saying, in a reply to question No. 592, that there is one child officially resident at Burnie Court. I asked whether the statement was correct, and how was it that a single mother with two children was in residence on 19 February. I got this answer back from Mr Connolly:
Both statements are correct but I am not prepared to divulge the particular circumstances of a tenant as it would be a serious breach of the Privacy Act.
Why? I did not want the name; I did not want the address, the flat number, or in fact the age of the children. These are simple questions, Madam Speaker. The real lulu of this privacy act was a rather difficult exchange I had with Mr Connolly on 17 June in relation to a 14-year-old girl living with a 19-year-old man in a bed-sitter. Mr Connolly, in his rather angry response to me, said:
But, if Mr Cornwell is genuinely concerned about that case, I can arrange for an officer to brief him about it, as much as I have been briefed about it.
When I was briefed two officers from Community Services came to see me, and they said, "We are terribly sorry; privacy prevents us from giving you any information whatsoever". Mr Connolly, I do hope that you were better briefed than I was on that particular issue, because, frankly, it was a farce. You gave me an undertaking to give me a briefing. I then found out that I could not be told anything about the issue because of privacy provisions. How can you justify your statements that the Government is being accountable to the community? We are representing the community as much as the individuals out there in the electorate who may come to you for information. How can you possibly justify that statement?
The last example, Madam Speaker, is this question of the public interest. You may remember 15 April and your reply to question No. 585, Mr Connolly, when I asked for some details of the incidence of crime at Burnie Court in Lyons. Mr Connolly came back with this reply:
I do not believe it is in the public interest to provide the information sought by Mr Cornwell.
That is an outrageous statement. It is absolutely outrageous. It so happened that the Woden Community Service kindly provided me with the information a fortnight ago. We had some details provided about various aspects of deaths, in fact, that have occurred.
Mr Connolly: Some allegations, unfounded, in relation to suicides, not the police crime report.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .