Joe O'Toole (Independent)

We are commencing the Committee Stage debate on the Bill. Section 36 of the principal Act deals with the powers of the commissioner, one of which is to keep the operation of the Act under review. That is part of his functions. The commissioner has now prepared a review of the Act, which is to be – or may already have been – published. Section 36(7) makes it an offence for any person or body to hinder or obstruct the commissioner's functions. If rushing this Bill through the House does not undermine that aspect of the commissioner's functions, it certainly treats it with absolute contempt and disrespect.

All Senators who have spoken on the Bill acknowledged that certain changes should be made; that is not the issue. We are ready to deal with changes to the Bill, but the Information Commissioner has not made his input in a formal manner. He has, however, produced an annual report on how the legislation is working. It is possible for the Government to make a specious argument saying it was interested in what the commissioner said last year, but it has now decided to disregard his current review which is about to be published. It has not been taken into consideration in any way, shape or form by the Government side in preparing the proposed amendments. I believe that attitude is wrong at all levels. However, before developing that argument I would like to hear some satisfactory explanation as to why the Government considers this to be the correct way of doing business.