Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the member for Indi's amendments. I think it is worth pointing out that the 2013 Hawke review explicitly recommended no application fees. This is the same review that the government is repeatedly referring to as back-up for other changes in the bill to show they have actually been supported previously. This is just another example of previous comments about the FOI legislation being cherry-picked, all in one direction and all towards making it harder for the public to access information. It may be that fees would prevent bad-faith actors from introducing large volumes of requests, but it is also likely to deter public interest journalism. Had the government consulted more widely than with just public servants, had it consulted with some of the journalists who use the FOI process to hold government to account, I think that it would have heard more about the impact of fees on public accountability. I think, then, the government would be much happier to support this amendments and make sure that we are not creating extra barriers for the public to find out what decisions government is making and why it's make those decisions.

See this speech in context