SA Ombudsman Wayne Lines calls for Freedom of Information overhaul

SOUTH Australia’s public sector watchdog has called for an overhaul of Freedom of Information laws that have been labelled worse than the rules of a third-world country.

Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, former SA Premier Mike Rann and cyclist Lance Armstrong during his infamous TDU visit.

• Daniel Wills: It’s our money – it’s our right to know
• End suppression of identities for alleged sex offenders
• Calls to open up State Commission Assessment Panel hearings

SOUTH Australia’s public sector watchdog has called for an overhaul of Freedom of Information laws that have been labelled worse than the rules of a third-world country.

SA Ombudsman Wayne Lines told The Advertiser ministers and heads of government departments should face penalties for meddling in requests for information, as new figures show more than 120 Freedom of Information (FoI) officers are employed in the state. In recent years, documents released through the FoI process have revealed a raft of information in the public interest, including the ineffectiveness of 3am lockout laws, a police shortage in the APY Lands, extraordinary levels of credit card expenditure at Onkaparinga Council and the state’s repeat domestic violence perpetrators.

However, the costly, cumbersome and adversarial process is regarded by experts as the worst in the country.

Mr Lines said the 27-year-old legislation underpinning the FoI process needed an overhaul.

“The whole point of Freedom of Information is to allow the transparency of government decision making and for the taxpayers to know where the money has been spent and make sure it has been spent wisely and prudently,” Mr Lines said.

“The more limits there are on secrecy the better it is for democracy.”

His calls come as one of Australia’s foremost freedom of information experts, University of Tasmania law lecturer Rick Snell, said third world countries had better laws than SA.

“If the politicians of a third world country were developing an FoI Act – it would look nothing like the SA Act,” Prof Snell said.

“There is nothing in the Act robust enough to cope with today’s spin doctors and information management.” Mr Lines has suggested a raft of improvements to the laws including:

FINING and publicly naming Ministers and heads of government departments found to be interfering with the process.

ENSURING technologies, such as CCTV can be released.

REDUCING the costs to FoI of requests.

COMPELLING agencies to release data when his office has deemed it should be.

ALLOW his office, or another agency, to actively investigate if agencies do actually hold information that they claim they cannot find.

“At the moment there is no obligation for agencies to release documents after an external review,” Mr Lines said.

“Currently I have got someone who has been waiting six months for documents to be released, after I said they should be. “I do not have the power to review a decision that the agency does not have the documents.

“They can just tell an applicant ‘We have had a look and we can’t find the documents, sorry’ and I don’t have a review power under that’.”

Statistics from the Attorney-General’s department show the number of FoI applications processed by the State Government has grown from 1208 (1991-92 financial year) to 10,555 last year – an almost ninefold increase.

Professor Snell, who is also a member of the international expert panel for the Open Government partnership, said the Act was ancient.

“People were still using Commodore 64 computers when the legislation was created,” he said.

“It was a system designed at the end of the paper based approach to record keeping.

“It is not quite horse and buggy stuff – but near enough.”

Mr Lines said the State Government should develop a push policy.

“There should be a greater onus on the agency to demonstrate why the documents should not be released,” he said. “They need to demonstrate that the release of information would be against the public interest. That would mean more documents would have to be released.

“More and more information is being placed on (department) websites ... but there is still a way to go.”

South Australia has a reputation as the least co-operative jurisdiction in the country for processing FoI requests.

Figures show that almost one in two FoI requests take longer than the 30-day expectation to be processed.

Some applicants can be asked to pay thousands of dollars for information.

A spokesman for State Records said commonly requested documents included personal records (including health, school, criminal or welfare records), minutes and agendas, decision rationale and policy documents. He said each request was “carefully assessed by staff in line with all relevant considerations” under state laws before decisions were made whether or not information would be released.

Requests could be complex and time consuming, while a single request could “require hundreds of pages of records to be located and assessed”, he said.

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman said: “The Premier said we will be a more open and accountable Government than the previous Labor administration.

“We will deliver on that commitment. South Australians will see that over the coming months,” she said.