Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (26 June) . . Page.. 2195 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

At the end of last year I announced that I was having a Bill put together that I hoped would change the bureaucratic culture of secrecy that is alive and well here in the ACT. Although the Bill has taken a bit of time to come together, the crucial element of this Bill will be to reverse the onus from people who seek information. It will now be up to the Government to convince the people of Canberra that it needs to keep secrets. If the Government has nothing to hide, then they have nothing to fear. My Bill will also reinterpret the working definition of what is in the public interest. In October 1993 the then Labor Attorney-General stated in the Canberra Times that what was in the public interest needed to be regulated by the Government. I could not disagree more with that statement. For a government to define what is in the public interest is invariably interpreted to mean what is in the government's interest, and I am keen to ensure that it is not the prerogative of government to decide which bits of information are to be made available. In addition, the Bill will contain a model of how an agency is to operate in an open and accountable manner. I would like to remind all members that you have repeatedly said that you are in favour of open and accountable government. Well, I am going to give it to you. After hearing of my announcement to put an FOI Bill together, Mr Humphries wrote to me and said:

... it is the policy of the Government to review freedom of information laws to increase access on the grounds of public interest and reduce delays in providing information and it seems to me that our aims in respect of freedom of information legislation are similar.

Well, we will see, will we not, Mr Humphries? In the meantime, I respectfully suggest that you get your house in order and functioning properly.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (4.53), in reply: Mr Speaker, in closing the debate on this Bill, I thank members for their support for the legislation. There are some important elements of the legislation which I think the FOI framework will benefit from. I think that passing the Bill today will facilitate a broadening of the scope of FOI to cover those semicommercial organisations or fully commercial organisations which are Territory-owned corporations in a way which acknowledges that as arms of government policy, in one sense, they need to have accountability and openness to the taxpayers who benefit from them or who support them, depending on the nature of the organisation. That is why the FOI Act will extend to them. Some other housekeeping matters, as I have described them here, are taken care of in the legislation. I think that is appropriate. I welcome members' support.

I do want to respond to the comments made about the FOI system generally as it operates in the ACT. Mr Osborne made reference, for example, to the hoops that one jumps through to get access to information. I certainly do not defend difficulties in the system in obtaining access to information. I know that when I was in opposition I spent a lot of time using FOI to attempt to get information from what I saw as a reluctant government unwilling to provide information. I think that, in commenting on supposed weaknesses or flaws in the FOI system, it behoves us to remember that this Government has put in place the single most dramatic reformation of FOI legislation that we have seen since the legislation was enacted. I refer to the almost complete abolition of fees for access to FOI

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .