❓ Questioning the proposed amalgamation of the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Ombudsman, the Attorney General defends the decision, stating WA will align with other Australian states.
AnsweredQoN 1179Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Attorney General to the annual report of the Office of the Information Commissioner, Western Australia, particularly to the commissioner’s serious concerns about the proposed amalgamation of the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman and her statement that if freedom of information is to be an effective tool to make agencies and Government accountable, it requires a strong and independent advocate. (1) Does the Attorney General concede that the amalgamation of these two different government watchdogs raises serious doubts about the ability of these bodies to undertake their two separate checks on government effectively? (2) Does the Attorney General concede that the proposed collocation of two other bodies that are subject to the Freedom of Information Act with the amalgamated body will further strain the credibility of the freedom of information process? (3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(1) Does the Attorney General concede that the amalgamation of these two different government watchdogs raises serious doubts about the ability of these bodies to undertake their two separate checks on government effectively? (2) Does the Attorney General concede that the proposed collocation of two other bodies that are subject to the Freedom of Information Act with the amalgamated body will further strain the credibility of the freedom of information process? (3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(2) Does the Attorney General concede that the proposed collocation of two other bodies that are subject to the Freedom of Information Act with the amalgamated body will further strain the credibility of the freedom of information process? (3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(1) Does the Attorney General concede that the amalgamation of these two different government watchdogs raises serious doubts about the ability of these bodies to undertake their two separate checks on government effectively? (2) Does the Attorney General concede that the proposed collocation of two other bodies that are subject to the Freedom of Information Act with the amalgamated body will further strain the credibility of the freedom of information process? (3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(2) Does the Attorney General concede that the proposed collocation of two other bodies that are subject to the Freedom of Information Act with the amalgamated body will further strain the credibility of the freedom of information process? (3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(3) Is the Attorney General aware that in no other jurisdiction in the world are the functions of the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner combined? Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr E.S. Ripper: Did you write that question? Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I did, thank you. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
(1)-(3) I advise the member for Nedlands that in respect of her last assertion, she is profoundly wrong. Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: I have quoted the commissioner. Did you not hear her on radio this morning? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments for the FOI commissioner and the Ombudsman. Nowhere else in Australia do two people occupy those two separate roles. In every other State that has an FOI commissioner and an Ombudsman, the Ombudsman occupies both of those roles. We are proposing that this State be like every other State in Australia. For the information of members, I will expand a bit on that. Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: Did you not listen to her this morning? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will not be dragged into a debate about factual matters with the retiring FOI commissioner. However, what I will say is that she is profoundly wrong. Nowhere else in Australia are those two positions occupied by two separate people. In every other State, the two positions are amalgamated. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: You want to take them backwards, not forwards. Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: What - to the same position as in every other State? Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: Yes - backwards. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Members will have the opportunity to debate this matter next year when the legislation is brought into the Parliament. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you not consult the commissioner? The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
The SPEAKER: Order! It strikes me that we are getting longer and longer question times, mostly because the minister who is trying to answer the question is interjected upon and another argument starts. I urge the member to let the minister complete his answer. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Western Australia is the only State in Australia that has two separate appointments to the position of FOI commissioner and the position of Ombudsman. The recommendation from the Machinery of Government Taskforce, which the Government has accepted, is that in Western Australia, as in every other State, the two positions should be amalgamated and one person should be appointed to both positions. The situation in Queensland is that one person is appointed to both of those positions. The situation in New South Wales and Victoria is that, by statutory force, whoever is the Ombudsman is automatically also the FOI commissioner. Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr P.D. Omodei: What about the Disability Services Commission? Will that be amalgamated with the Department for Community Development? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will leave that vacuous comment where it belongs. We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
We will be following the pattern that exists in all the other States of Australia. When the legislation comes to the House next year, members will have the opportunity to put their point of view. It will then become profoundly obvious to the member for Nedlands that she is wrong in the assumption that underpins the question that she asked. It is not the case that the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Ombudsman are not amalgamated anywhere else in the world. It is the case that they are amalgamated in every other State in Australia. That is how profoundly wrong the member for Nedlands is. When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
When the legislation is brought forward next year, it will be in a number of parts. Firstly, it will expand the range of documents that will be made available under freedom of information in this State. That is unlike - if we take the words of the FOI commissioner - what occurred under the former coalition Government, which restricted the number of documents that could be made available under FOI. The only change that has been made since the last Labor Government in this State enacted freedom of information legislation is that the former coalition Government acted to restrict the number of documents that could be made available. Consistent with our original move in bringing in freedom of information legislation, we will expand the range of government documents to which the public can have access under FOI. The FOI commissioner said on radio this morning that if a Government does not want FOI to succeed, it will do three things. The first thing it will do is increase the fees to make it prohibitive for people to access FOI. She went on to say that that has not happened in Western Australia. The second thing it will do is starve the FOI commissioner of resources. She went on to say that her office is not being starved of resources. The third thing it will do is limit the range of documents that can be released. Our legislation will expand the range of documents that can be released. That is what the FOI commissioner said this morning on the Liam Bartlett show. Each of the actions of the Labor Party in government has been to enhance the Office of the Information Commissioner, and that is exactly what the legislation that we will bring before the Parliament next year will do.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.