Page 355 - Week 02 - Thursday, 8 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We had Mrs Dunne railing against the evils of conclusive certificates and how they are abused and should not be allowed, but her leader stood up 20 minutes before and said, “We are going to support the clause.” Mrs Dunne is going to vote for the clause that puts in place a conclusive certificate. So I think the hypocrisy of Mrs Dunne’s position needs to be exposed. Conclusive certificates either are appropriate or they are not, but Mrs Dunne is being a hypocrite, Mr Speaker; she is being a hypocrite.
MR SPEAKER: You will have to withdraw that.
MR CORBELL: I withdraw that, Mr Speaker. Let me come to the issue of conclusive certificates. I thank Dr Foskey for her comments, which I think were considered and obviously well-researched. Let me draw members’ attention to the current provisions of the Freedom of Information Act and what the government is proposing to put in place.
Conclusive certificates can be issued in two sets of circumstances under the current act. These relate to executive documents and documents concerning commonwealth-state relations. Executive documents obviously are cabinet documents, documents for the consideration of or being considered by the executive. I do not think anyone is seriously advancing in this place that cabinet documents be subject to freedom of information requests, and that is the current situation in relation to executive documents. If Mrs Dunne is objecting to the use of conclusive certificates, maybe she should go back to taws in relation to executive documents and explain why she believes cabinet documents should be released through freedom of information.
Commonwealth-state relations are another matter. There is a longstanding provision there, as with executive documents. Commonwealth-state relations are obviously matters which have always been exempt from the FOI Act through a conclusive certificate. Working documents, I am advised, are not subject to the conclusive certificate regime.
Mr Speaker, that needs to be considered by members. Those are the circumstances in which conclusive certificates can be issued. They are longstanding provisions. As far as I am aware, no member of this place has previously objected in terms of previous considerations of the Freedom of Information Act to the application of conclusive certificates in those circumstances.
That is what currently exists. The government is proposing to insert a new clause that deals with information received by the territory around national security, defence or international relations, and it does propose a conclusive certificates regime in that regard. What is the reason for that? The reason is very simple. If the territory wishes to receive and share information from the commonwealth relating to security or defence matters, we need this provision. The commonwealth will not accept a proposition whereby they share intelligence information with us and that information could be captured through a simple FOI request.
It is not about whether we generate this information, as Mrs Dunne suggests. No, we do not generate the information. The ACT does not have its own intelligence agencies and so on. But we hold it, and we are given it and it is shared with us. Why does that
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .