Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025
Mr WALLACE (Fisher) (17:36): The coalition is opposed to the Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025, lock, stock and smoking barrel. I acknowledge the amendments that were moved by the Attorney-General, and I thank her for doing so, but they do not remedy all of the many problems that have been raised by my parliamentary colleagues and many stakeholders. This bill does not have a friend, apart from the Public Service.
When every stakeholder, the crossbench and the coalition are combining to say that the bill is extremely problematic, it is incumbent on the government to have a very long, hard look at the bill. As many of my colleagues have mentioned so far, the concept of freedom of information is a fundamental tenet of our democracy. Our democracy can be inconvenient at times.
That's the price you pay for living in a democracy. I get it. I understand that sometimes requests for freedom of information may be difficult and arduous, but the concept of putting these 40-hour time limits on requests for information goes against the very basis of freedom of information.
It goes against the very basis of a bulwark of our democracy— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Dr Garland ): I'm sorry to interrupt the member, but I would ask that you be relevant to the amendments that are before the House. Mr WALLACE: Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm able to speak on the bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I put the question that the amendments be agreed to.
Mr WALLACE: I have been relevant, actually, insofar as the amendments that have been put forward by the Attorney go to— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, they're the amendments from the member for Curtin. Mr WALLACE: I'm sorry. The amendments moved by the member for Curtin are very sensible amendments.
Basically, what they are asking the government to do is to go and do an independent inquiry on the bill. When this bill does not have a friend in the world and when all of the stakeholders are saying that there should, in fact, be an independent inquiry—not a parliamentary inquiry, which would no doubt be stacked with government members who would no doubt support this bill.
A proper independent inquiry has been called for in relation to the concept of changing the FOI Act for many years. It beggars belief that this government would not seek to get all of the barnacles out on the table. It's this concept—this is a government that campaigned in the lead-up to the 2022 election on honesty, on transparency and on accountability and, now it's in government, it doesn't want to be held to account.
This government wants to make life difficult for Australians who want answers from their government. I implore the Attorney to reconsider—just hit pause. Why won't the Attorney hit pause and commission an independent inquiry in relation to this bill?