Enhancing Open and Accountable Government

The paper is published by an “Independent Review Panel” appointed by Premier Bligh to review the Freedom of Information Act 1992. The three member panel is led by well known barrister, constitutional commentator and writer, Dr David Solomon, who is joined by former bureaucrat, Ms Simone Webbe, and McCullough Robertson solicitor, Dominic McGann. The decision to appoint the panel was made on 17 September 2007. Accordingly, it cannot be said the panel has sat on its hands — producing a 214 page discussion paper in a little over 4 months, festive season included. Contrast this with the proposed timetable outlined by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) for a similar review of the Commonwealth FOI Act which was announced on 24 September 2007:  the ALRC plans to release an issues paper in March-April 2008, followed by a discussion paper in August-September 20082. The Queensland timetable, however, was imposed by the Terms of Reference and one cannot help but think the result is a discussion paper which has more the flavour of an issues paper.

In addition to requiring the premature publication of a discussion paper, the Terms of Reference given to Dr Solomon’s panel are as wide-ranging as the Eastern Grey Kangaroo3. They require the panel to “identify ways to improve and modernise the FOI regime” by addressing issues ranging from the “the purposes and principles of freedom of information” to the minutiae of “the appropriateness of current time limits contained in the Act”. In doing so, the panel is exhorted to consider, but not limit itself to, a lengthy list of matters including interstate and overseas FOI reviews and practices. 

The resulting discussion paper is a bold attempt by the panel to touch on each of the matters set forth in the Terms of Reference and then invite community submissions in relation to them. While, for students and legal scholars alike, the paper contains an excellent outline of the history of the Queensland FOI Act and its many amendments, as well as a comparative review of FOI schemes in other jurisdictions of relevance, many other topics are, of necessity, dealt with superficially.  

There are not less than 132 questions posed by the discussion paper which, handsomely, beats the 75 discussion points outlined in the last discussion paper which sought community input upon a review of the FOI Act in 2000.4  The questions range from important philosophical issues to nuts and bolts issues. Compare, for example, “Is there a public ‘right’ to information held by the government, information about the personal affairs of people and about the way government is conducted?” with: “Should the exemptions in s.45(1)(a) and (b) also be made subject to a public interest test?”. Surely, the task of choosing which of the multitudinous questions to address will prove daunting for stake-holders.

In this regard, the discussion paper does very little to promote community discussion because there is no focus. If it is intended to have a genuine discussion about some of the philosophical underpinnings of the FOI regime (as is apparently intended), then some focus to that discussion needs to be given without simultaneously seeking a discussion on a range of narrower issues. The big picture should be painted first.

For all its limitations, the discussion paper contains some information that may be of use to the legal practitioner, including a helpful overview of information privacy laws and practices in all Australian jurisdictions.5 Any practitioner looking for an inexpensive annotated FOI Act, however, will be disappointed.

If you wish to make a submission in response to any of the 132 questions posed in the discussion paper, you will also have to be quick: submissions close 7 March 2008. However, there is an indication that extensions may be granted. The Discussion Paper is free and available online at www.foireview.qld.gov.au or in hard copy from the Panel Secretariat on 32222309.

GAVIN REBETZKE Roma Mitchell Chambers  

Discussion Paper, 29 January 2008

Freedom of Information Independent Review Panel (Solomon, D., S. Webbe, and D. McGann)

Footnotes

1.   Bligh, A. M., Press conference, 17 September 2007, quoted in the discussion paper, page 16.
2.   ALRC website: http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/current/foi/timetable.htm  (accessed 26 February 2008)
3.   Macropus giganteus. See http://museumvictoria.com.au/DiscoveryCentre/Infosheets/Eastern-Grey-Kangaroo/ .
4.   Parliamentary, Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee, Freedom of Information for Queensland, Discussion Paper 1, 9 February 2000, referred to in the discussion paper under review, page 32.
5.   At Appendix 1.  Incidently, the ALRC published a Discussion paper Review of Australian Privacy Laws in September 2007.