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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3191 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

In 1993, after our current FOI Act had been in effect for four years, it was clear that the ACT bureaucracy was gradually becoming more secretive and took longer to process FOI requests than its Federal counterpart. The situation has improved since then. However, there is still much room for further improvement. Generally speaking, freedom of information legislation originally grew out of public demand for more open and accountable government. It sounds familiar, does it not, Mr Speaker? As governments in general tend to want to avoid close scrutiny if at all possible, provisions for creative exemptions are gradually added to legislation and measures such as the 30-year rule have come into being.

When our present Attorney-General, Mr Humphries, was in opposition, he once stated in the Assembly that the true test of a good government is whether or not its record is able to be scrutinised.

Mr Berry: That was when he used to tell the truth.

MR OSBORNE: That was over the issue of VITAB, too, by the way, Mr Speaker. In other words, he was saying that there needed to be a high level of access to government-held information. I trust that he still holds that view, because this Bill provides for him and the Government of which he is the deputy leader to be scrutinised.

Generally speaking, this Bill sets out to achieve two major reforms: Firstly, to simplify the process of making a freedom of information application; and, secondly, to restrict access to official information only to the extent necessary to protect essential public interest, to protect commercial confidentiality and to preserve the privacy of individuals. In addition to this, full access is to be given to personal information held on an individual by the Government, including medical records, with obvious necessary safeguards in place.

The first of these reforms, concerning the process of making applications, has attempted to combine the best aspects of the former central office and the new decentralised system currently in operation. This new process incorporates the concept of having a designated records officer with an agency or department. However, the role of that records officer would be extended to include providing hands-on help for people who need assistance in making their application. The intention is to ensure that the resulting FOI application is tailored to the requirements of the applicant as much as possible.

Several minor changes to this part of the Act, which affect current practice, have been included. These include agencies having shorter time periods for compliance regarding their obligations under the Act and providing for a wider range of ways in which access to documents or information can be given to applicants. The parts of the Act relating to exempt documents and access to personal records have been completely replaced. The documents to which access is restricted would fall into two categories - documents which are fully exempt and with no time restrictions placed on them, and documents which are subject to public interest exceptions but only for a period of 12 months.

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