Rex Patrick (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you. Of course I understand that process quite well. Unfortunately, this is the sort of thing at estimates where we get a relatively simple question—and I have spelt out this question in detail—and I end up getting an answer that seeks to avoid actually answering the question. That is exactly the sort of treatment we get at estimates. I am in a process now—in fact, there is a motion that will come before the Senate in the next day or so—where officials refused to provide a valuation that had been obtained on a water licence, a valuation that itself stated that after 90 days it was no longer valid and gave cautions about relying on it after that time, and was denied to the Senate on order for production and questions on notice, and yet a citizen can get it under FOI.

So you have a track record—or the government has a track record—of being very cavalier in the way public interest immunities are advanced, and the Senate is actually not very good at standing up for itself. I say that regretfully. I refer you to my first speech when I talked about the difficulties or the failures of the Senate to enforce these sorts of orders. We have a shameful situation where a citizen can get an answer under FOI but a senator cannot—in fact, an order of the Senate does not produce that answer. So that's my concern.

I'm actually genuinely trying to work out whether or not to support the Greens motion. I would have thought that, having looked at these—and you've stated, Minister, that you don't want to support this particular amendment. I'm trying to understand where the offence lies or where the difficulty lies in these very specific questions. They're not hypotheticals. I simply want to know whether or not the officials would answer. I point out very specifically that it is not for an official to deny the answer to a question; only a minister can do that. You are representing the minister at this point in time in this chamber.