Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 3427 ..
MR SMYTH (continuing):
This is the responsibility of the department. The request was forwarded, quite rightly, by the Department Treasury and Infrastructure to my department, because the IAM functions had come across to the Department Urban Services.
On 14 November 2000 Mr Alan Thompson, the chief executive of the Urban Services Department, wrote to Mr Corbell. I will read the letter, then table it. It says:
Dear Mr Corbell
I refer to your application of 18 October 2000 to the Chief Executive, Department of Treasury and Infrastructure, in which you sought access, under the Freedom of Information Act 1989, to the following documents:
"copies of all documents, notes and other papers held by the Department concerning land infill studies since 22 September 2000."
This request has been transferred to Urban Services following the recent administrative changes.
Due to these changes and the volume of work involved in your request I seek your agreement to an extension of time to process your application. I propose to provide this information to you by 18 December 2000.
If you have any queries, please contact the Freedom of Information Officer on 62076195.
Yours sincerely
Alan Thompson
I table the following paper:
Land infill studies-Request by Mr Corbell for documents pursuant to Freedom of Information Act-Copy of letter from Chief Executive, Department of Urban Services to Mr Simon Corbell MLA, dated 14 November 2000.
We have complied with the act. Because of the change in arrangements, we were unable to meet Mr Corbell's request. It is quite ludicrous that, having given the first array of documents, quite a stack of them, to Mr Corbell, we would then suddenly not give him the second set of documents. The request was about IAM, but when it was transferred to my department it involved all of my department, which includes PALM and other areas. The department is doing a search of all the documents that might relate to Mr Corbell's request.
There is nothing sinister here. Mr Corbell was informed of this decision. Yet he lashes out in a press release and moves a motion that puts his request above the law. He should follow the law, and he knows that well. We can all make our own assumptions as to why this motion has suddenly lobbed here. When the documents are ready, they certainly will be provided to Mr Corbell as requested. The government will vote against the motion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .