Page 1759 - Week 05 - Thursday, 2 April 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
government. There are issues on recovering costs in those circumstances, which should be appropriately considered, and equally where there are vexatious requests. There is a requirement for that to also be had account of in determining how the FOI Act should operate in future.
Finally, as Mrs Dunne mentioned, the government is proposing an additional subparagraph in the terms of reference that asks the committee to look at issues on the release of cabinet documents and whether or not there are improvements in practice that can be brought into effect to provide for the more ready access to a range of cabinet documents—not all cabinet documents. Obviously there are some documents that necessarily need to retain their confidentiality to protect the deliberations and the effective workings of the cabinet and cabinet confidentiality and solidarity.
There is, nevertheless, an argument, I think, to be explored as to whether there are some cabinet documents that should be subject to more general or easy release or access. There are developments in other jurisdictions, particularly in the United Kingdom, that come to mind that are worthy, I think, of further consideration.
I thank Mrs Dunne for her indication that she would be supporting these amendments, notwithstanding her earlier comment, and I commend the amendments to members.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (10.48): I rise today to welcome the terms of reference put on the table by Mrs Dunne. I think that it is a good initiative. Given the age of the freedom of information law, the various innovations that are going on in other states and at the commonwealth level, and simply the innovations that have taken place in society generally since the introduction of the act, it is timely to have a comprehensive and considered review of the act as a whole.
I would like to flag that the Greens will be supporting Mr Corbell’s amendments. They add depth to the terms of reference and enable us to look at the full range of issues around the Freedom of Information Act. I note that when we passed some changes to the Freedom of Information Act in the Assembly recently we flagged that we would be taking a broader look at the Freedom of Information Act. Again, I think it is valuable, having already made some changes, to look at the overall balance of the act. I very much look forward to this inquiry.
I wish to flag that I will be seeking leave to move the amendments circulated in my name. The purpose of the amendments—and they have been discussed with fellow members in this place—is twofold. One seeks to insert new subparagraphs (2)(a) and (2)(b) by putting into the inquiry’s consideration perhaps the more progressive elements of freedom of information legislation that are being considered in other places where, by taking advantage of the pervasiveness of the internet, documents can be made more freely available and can be made available by default rather than necessarily having to be sought. It is valuable to look at what is happening in other countries, whether their legislation is working well and whether it is suitable for a jurisdiction such as the ACT.
I wish to speak briefly to my proposed new paragraph (4)(i). That is where we look at the benefits in terms of the appointment of an independent information commissioner
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .