QUESTION: Peter Bennett, Whistleblowers Australia. Senator, both the whistleblower legislation and this FOI legislation contains no penalty clauses against those people who don't carry out the duties of making sure that the information is released in respect of FOI or ensuring that whistleblowers are protected. Without those enforcement provisions within the respective legislation it's a waste of time having the legislation.
If you can't force these people to actually release the information or protect whistleblowers and make them accountable when they fail to do so, then the legislation fails.
JOHN FAULKNER: Well, thank you, Peter, for your question. Let me respectfully correct you. I didn't of course address the issue of whistleblowers in my speech, as you would appreciate, and it's not accurate in fact to say that there is whistleblowers legislation.
At this stage we've had a report by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs which has recently reported - under the chairmanship of my colleague Mark Dreyfus who's with us here today - the House of Representatives Committee has reported to the parliament in relation to the whistleblowers issues.
I would commend the report to everyone present at today's conference, I think it is a very comprehensive report into public interest disclosures.
The process is this: that the Government is presently considering the recommendations in the report. I'm certainly committed to introducing legislation on whistleblowers into Parliament during the current term of the Parliament. And it's at that point, after the Government formulates its response on these matters to the House of Representatives report, that the issue of sanctions is most appropriately addressed.
But I want to make it clear at this stage the whistleblowers issue is up to this stage: that the Government is preparing its response - I have primary carriage and responsibility for that - to the House of Representatives committee report. And after the Government's response is tabled in the Parliament the Government will develop legislation and deal with the sorts of issues that have been just raised in the question.
CONVENER: Is there a question there? Yes.
QUESTION: Michael McKinnon, I'm the FOI editor for the Seven Network. Senator Faulkner congratulations on what on the face of it is an excellent reform of the act. But I'm wondering what is the situation, as Right To Know argued that parliament itself should be accessible under the FOI Act, what is the situation with that? Otherwise we won't ever get Susan - you know, Belinda Neal's anger management stuff.
JOHN FAULKNER: Thanks very much for that question, Michael, I really appreciate it.
[Laughter]
The Government does not propose to include MPs within the scope of the FOI Act. This act is about providing access to documents of the executive, and I have announced today very significant far reaching reform in relation to that.
Now of course there other mechanisms that are available if, Michael, you wish to progress the specific matter that you addressed in your question, and you know well about them. There is already, there is of course a lot of information that is held by agencies; the most relevant agency in relation - if I can just be serious - in relation to the matter you raised is obviously in the Department of Finance and Deregulation.
While I'm here today before you as - wearing a hat of Cabinet Secretary, obviously I'm also the Special Minister of State - you would appreciate there are many documents held within the Department of Finance and Deregulation on these sorts of issues. So there certainly is, if you like, that interface between these reforms and the sort - the type of inquiry that you mentioned in your question.
Apart from that, I'm pleased with the comment that - that you opened your question with.
CONVENER: Yes, gentleman here.
QUESTION: Peter Timmins, Minister, and, again, I express my congratulations not only for what you've outlined today, but I think the strong personal emphasis on the spirit and intent of the act is also something very pleasing to those of us who've been very critical of what's happened over the years.
But a couple of questions: is there any reason why we can't start now in greater proactive disclosure of information? For example, an area in your own special area of responsibility; the publication of travel expenses by members of Parliament, for example, published twice a year by the Department of Finance and Deregulation, but it's not on the web.
I know it's a matter for Parliament, but things like the Register of Interests are not on the web. As you know, a private initiative has now put up a version of that, and congratulations to those involved in the Open Australia Initiative. But is there any reason why we can't start now; I think that would be a good indicator of seriousness of intent.
And, secondly, I was very glad to hear you emphasising the objects of the new act, that there will be an emphasis on the use of government information for the promotion of public purposes. Does this raise any issues about copyright legislation? And can we contemplate any reform that might see Federal Government copyright start to move in the direction of the United States where government has no copyright claim?
JOHN FAULKNER: Thanks, Peter. You ask about the - you asked about the release of the information in advance of the - this legislation being enacted. As you may be aware we're planning a start-up date here of January 2010, which I believe will provide enough time for the Government to finalise the bill for parliamentary committees if they wish to closely examine the provisions in the bills to do so, for the bills to pass the Parliament and for the planning and setting up of new office such as the Office of the Information Commissioner and the like.
While I do accept broadly the point that you make about the release of information, what I'm finding at the moment, Peter, is that there just is a limit to the number of hours in the day.
In my role - you mentioned my role as Special Minister of State, I've already had tabled in Parliament the first ever annual report on ministerial staff, I think a significant step forward in transparency. We're going to see the tabling of not annual but six-monthly reports in relation to government advertising. That process is very well underway and I think the first of those reports is about to go.
And I do accept also the principle that transparency is important in these areas. I have long argued as persuasively as I can within government and within the Parliament, that certainly in the area of the administration of parliamentary entitlements, more transparency leads to better practice. And I have made any number of statements to that effect. It leads to more accountability and better practice.
So I support the princ… not only do I support the principle, I hope you've seen some very tangible indications that I'm putting that into practice wearing my hat as Special Minister of State.
You do mention the issue of the Register of Pecuniary Interests. The point may well be well made in relation to it not being available on the web. I'm very loath to trample into areas that are the responsibility of both the Department of the House of Representatives and the Department of the Senate, as you would appreciate. The points are well made, and I can certainly pass that on to my colleagues, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate.
You raised one other issue in your question in relation to any copyright implications. I can only say this to you, Peter - I have not been briefed of any - in relation to any copyright implication at this stage. But one of the advantages we have with the consultation period, that if any such matters do arise and do need to be addressed, we certainly have I think a very good parliamentary - a process for parliamentary examination that will enable us to do so.
At this stage, I can only say to you, I have not been briefed of any implications; but I don't necessarily for a moment suggest that this type of issue won't arise as we closely examine the provisions, all the provisions of the legislation. And the Government's commitment will be to look at these things in a, in a sensible and constructive way.
We want to get this legislation right. I want to get this legislation right. And I'm willing to work with all of you, and of course the, both houses of parliament and its committees, to do just that.
CONVENER: Now, I don't want to trample on this wonderful opportunity to ask the Minister questions while we have him, but I do need to move on, so, we will have one final question if that's okay.
Matthew Moore.
QUESTION: Thank you. Minister, as a frustrated FOI user I too would like to join with the others here and congratulate you on what at first glance seem to be some really substantial reforms.
One of the things that's clearly going to occur with the abolition of fees for applications is a flood of applications. Many of those I would expect to end in the Office of the Information Commissioner.
I just wonder if you can give us any sort of outline of the resourcing you would expect for that office, or the staffing; because, you look at the experience in the UK, there have been - where they also have no application fees - there have been thousands of matters end up there. And I - it just seems a very substantial sort of office.
Thanks.
JOHN FAULKNER: Well thanks, Matthew.
The, let me say this in relation to fees and charges: the Government is committed to delivering on its election promises in relation to the fees and charges issue. We are delivering on our commitment to make FOI free for people seeking access to their personal records. We are also making FOI more affordable by removing all of the FOI application fees, and providing for charge-free periods for decision making time.
We've also indicated that - I've also indicated that there will be a further inquiry conducted by the Information Commissioner into this issue as I outlined in my speech.
The issue in relation to appropriate resourcing of the new Office of the Information Commissioner, suffice to say, while I don't make public statements in relation to budget matters before budgets, what I can say to you is this, Matthew - that I wouldn't be making the announcement I have if I was dealing with those sorts of issues on a wing and prayer.
I can, I can assure you that the Government is not only committed to the policy framework I have announced today; I can assure you and everyone at this conference that the Office of the Information Commissioner will be very adequately resourced.
CONVENER: Please thank Senator John Faulkner.
[Applause]
* * End * *
| Media Contact: | Website: |
|---|---|
| Media Adviser - Colin Campbell - 0407 787 181 | www.cabinetsecretary.gov.au www.smos.gov.au |