Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I want to congratulate Senator Gallacher on so eloquently highlighting the secrecy of this government in bypassing proper scrutiny of the parliament in many areas of government and highlighting the government's lack of accountability and transparency. Why are we here today debating this private senator's bill, the Freedom of Information (Requests and Reasons) Bill 2015? When tabling his private senator's bill, Senator Joe Ludwig said in his media release that the reasons he felt this was needed was in terms of holding this government to account and ensuring that the secrecy that they seek to bring over the parliament and their decisions are properly scrutinised. Senator Ludwig said that the Abbott government have jeopardised the balance that Labor has put into the FOI Act and have skewed the FOI Act to favour secrecy, which has led to a lack of transparency in the government. That is why he has introduced this bill to allow, among other things, the public to know exactly why a freedom of information request has been rejected or edited by the department.

This bill is a reasonably straightforward piece of legislation but is one dealing with a critical issue, and that is government transparency. The bill before us seeks to amend the Freedom of Information Act to require government agencies and ministers to publish the exact wording of freedom of information requests. It will also require government agencies and ministers to publish a statement of reasons concerning their decision to allow, refuse or edit the release of requested documents.

The amendments outlined in this bill aim to embolden the balance and openness that Labor has strived to instil in Australia's freedom of information regime. These principles of balance and openness were core to the important reforms to freedom of information that Labor implemented when in government. Labor strongly believes that freedom of information is an essential part of our democracy. Freedom of information is central to government accountability and transparency, because it gives members of the public and media access to information about what the government does and the decisions they make.

Since freedom of information laws were first introduced in Australia by the Whitlam government in the 1970s, Labor has worked to strengthen these laws to improve transparency in government. Labor has long worked to champion the public's right to know. In the last term of government Labor continued this work, making important changes to move to a pro-disclosure model of governance, striking an important balance between the need for confidentiality and the legitimate right of the public to know. Labor's reforms were wide-ranging, impacting on all elements of the freedom of information regime, including access procedures, freedom of information charges, exemption criteria, freedom of information objectives, the procedure for a review of disputed decisions, and publication of information by agencies and freedom of information reporting by agencies.

These reforms made significant strides to enhance the public's statutory rights to documents and information and encourage a culture of political accountability and openness. Striking this balance is important for transparent government, and in coming to government Labor committed to restoring this balance in order to restore trust and integrity within government. However, since winning the election the Abbott government has worked to undermine and jeopardise the balance Labor established in the freedom of information regime. This government is addicted to secrecy—secrecy at the expense of the transparency and integrity that is vital to the operation of our democracy.

That is why my Labor colleague Senator Ludwig has introduced this bill—to move to restore the balance between the need for some confidentiality in governance and the legitimate right of the public to know about the operation of government. Currently, in spite of Labor's significant reforms, freedom of information requests can still be refused, or documents may be edited with minimal justification. This leads to abuses of the system as reasonable requests for information are denied. This bill seeks to address this threat to government transparency. The amendments in his bill seek to support and advance the principles at the very heart of Australia's freedom of information legislation by facilitating more practical use of freedom of information requests and enhancing the principles of accountability and efficiency. This will be achieved by inserting a new section into the act that would require government agencies and ministers to publish the exact wording of each freedom of information request and a statement of reasons for the decisions. This will allow members of the public to see exactly what information has been requested and the reasons it has or has not been provided. This will also assist people seeking similar information and reduce duplication. Making this type of information available also opens up the freedom of information process and decisions to greater scrutiny.

The bill includes important protections of the privacy of applicants, as certain identifying information would be removed for publication. Examples of information that may be removed are personal information and information about the business, commercial, financial or professional affairs of a person. Further, the bill requires information to be removed if the information commissioner determines that it would be unreasonable to publish that information.

Importantly, this bill also provides that where a document is released under freedom of information it must be made readily and easily available to members of the public. This will be achieved by removing the option that an agency or minister may merely publish details on their website of how the information may be obtained. Rather, the bill ensures that the information is available directly from an agency's or minister's website or through a link on the website to another location where the information can be downloaded. These amendments build on Labor legacy of transparent and accountable governance. They enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of our freedom of information scheme and, importantly, will start to pierce the veil of secrecy this government seeks to cloak itself in. It is necessary to take these steps to meet current and future challenges to freedom of information legislation.

We know that those opposite have no interest in supporting and enhancing our freedom of information scheme to address these challenges. In fact, only last year we saw those opposite attack fundamental elements of our freedom of information regime. As part of the 2014-15 budget the Abbott government announced the 'Smaller Government—Privacy and Freedom of Information functions—new arrangements' measure. This measure was nothing more than an attack on freedom of information in Australia, by a government desperate to hide what it is doing. The Abbott government sought to repeal a number of measures that had been introduced by the previous, Labor, government to improve transparency across government by strengthening the freedom of information regime.

Most significantly, those opposite sought to abolish the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and the positions of Australian Information Commissioner and Freedom of Information Commissioner. Labor had established the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner to provide independent oversight of the freedom of information regime and to champion freedom of information across government. This body was integral not only to managing access to information but also to changing culture in the public services towards a pro-disclosure ethos. However, in seeking to abolish this body those opposite proposed to give oversight of freedom of information to the government's own minister—in this case, Senator Brandis. They also proposed that external merits review of freedom of information decisions would have to be made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. This had nothing to do with simplification or streamlining, as those opposite claimed, but rather it was about stifling the accessibility of the freedom of information regime. This change would have removed applicants' ability to request that the independent Information Commissioner review a refusal by the government to provide documents under freedom of information. The Abbott government wanted to force anyone wanting an independent review of a government decision to go to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, where the filing fee alone is over $800.

When those opposite failed to pass legislation to abolish the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and the positions of Australian Information Commissioner and Freedom of Information Commissioner, they attempted to starve the organisation of funds. At Senate estimates at the end of last year, it was revealed that, due to lack of funding, both the Australian Information Commission and the Freedom of Information Commission had been forced to work from home. At budget estimates last month, the Information Commissioner confirmed that these arrangements continue. While the budget restored funding to the Office of the Australia Information Commission for a dozen staff, there are only about half what there were before the government launched its attack on the organisation.

But what else can we expect from a government intent on returning Australia to an outdated and flawed system of freedom of information? This is a government that will do whatever it can to avoid scrutiny by the public that elected it. As Senator Gallacher stated in his contribution, it will do whatever it can to avoid the scrutiny of the parliament.

In contrast, Labor are committed to the principles of FOI, whether we are in government or in opposition. That is why we support the amendments in this bill, amendments which seek to provide greater accountability and integrity in our system of democracy. I congratulate Senator Ludwig on introducing this private member's bill. I commend the bill to the Senate.