Page 2422 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 9 August 2016

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


MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for the Environment and Climate Change): I seek leave to make some comments on the report.

Leave granted.

MR CORBELL: I would like to join with you in acknowledging the work of Mr Bayne as the legal adviser to the scrutiny of bills committee. The scrutiny of bills committee performs a very important function in this place. It is a key element of the human rights protection mechanisms that are engaged in this place’s deliberation of laws. I want to join with other members in acknowledging his very lengthy period of service and the important contribution he has made.

I would also like this morning to draw to the attention of members the quite extraordinary comments from the committee, the unanimous comments from the committee, in its report on the Freedom of Information Bill 2016, the executive member’s bill from Mr Rattenbury. I have to say, Madam Speaker, that I do not think I have ever seen such extraordinary and strong comments from the scrutiny of bills committee on a bill.

It is clear that there is a very strong disagreement between the committee and Mr Rattenbury as to the function and operation of his law. Recognising Mr Bayne’s own personal expertise in freedom of information law dating back over many decades and the fact that he has advised the committee in its response, and the committee has chosen to adopt it, I think it is prudent that members in this place reflect on the scrutiny of bills committee report in determining the question as to whether or not Mr Rattenbury’s bill should be agreed to later this week.

Perhaps the most telling comment from the scrutiny of bills committee is in its final sentence. In response to Mr Rattenbury’s comments on the scrutiny of bills committee report, the committee concludes:

The member’s comments—

That is Mr Rattenbury’s comments—

suggest that he has not grasped how his own bill might operate.

These are quite strong comments from what is normally a cautious and conservative committee. What is clear from the committee’s comments is that Mr Rattenbury’s bill presents a very real prospect of a more complex freedom of information regime that could lead to delay and more conservative decision-making on the part of the government and its agencies; that the length of time for decisions and appropriate review mechanisms will become more complex and lengthy; that the potential costs, including fees for applicants, could increase considerably; and that the requirement for decision notices will also lead to complexity.


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