<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2013-09-11" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="6781" />
  <endPage num="6878" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>State Records</name>
      <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000692">
        <heading>STATE RECORDS</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Norwood</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-09-11">
            <name>STATE RECORDS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-09-11T14:24:00" />
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000693">
          <timeStamp time="2013-09-11T14:24:00" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr MARSHALL (Norwood—Leader of the Opposition) (14:24):</by>  My question is to the Attorney-General. Can the Attorney confirm to the house that the 2010 state records agency review uncovered breaches of the State Records Act in over 100 agencies and that, although action plans were developed in each of these agencies, there will be no verification of the implementation of the action plans until 2014?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Enfield</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Planning</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Business Services and Consumers</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-09-11">
            <name>STATE RECORDS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-09-11T14:25:00" />
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000694">
          <timeStamp time="2013-09-11T14:25:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (14:25):</by>  Yes; I thank the honourable member for his question. Again, the question is something that arises from the conversation we had this morning. I quibble with one word in that question, which is the word 'breaches', and I need to explain why I quibble with that. There are two levels of offending against the State Records Act. The first level is basically an agency which is for whatever reason failing to comply with the standard that the State Records people want of the agency (that is under section 23 of the act).</text>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000695">That obviously does not constitute a criminal offence by the agency, because how could it? Whereas, there is another area under the legislation which would apply to an individual who knowingly commits a breach. I think the use of the term 'breach' is unhelpful in this circumstance. I am able to confirm that the information we received this morning was to the effect that 400 and something agencies were involved in the 2010 review. There were 100, or thereabouts, instances which are regarded as of concern by the agency, and they went back to the agencies and said, 'Righty oh, we want you to put in place measures—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="interjection">
        <name>Mr Marshall</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000696">
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr Marshall:</by>  Action plan.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <page num="6820" />
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000697">
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU:</by>  —an action plan—to deal with these matters.' In the ordinary course of events it was the intention of the State Records office to follow up on those in the course of 2014, as I understand it. By and large, the question I basically am agreeing with but with the provision I have made. However, I do not believe and the government does not believe that that is enough by itself, because it has become evident to me and it has become evident to the government, as we stated some weeks ago, that the State Records Act of 1997 was not crafted with the current volume or style of information technology in mind. This has meant that there is potential disconnect between the State Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Public Sector Management Act, and privacy principles operating within the state. All of those need to be brought into alignment and become consistent. It is also—</text>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000698">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="74">Mr Marshall interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000699">
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU:</by>  Indeed; and that is why a week or two ago, or more now, we announced that Mr Moss, a former District Court judge, was being commissioned to provide the government with a report which would analyse all of these issues and provide the government with recommendations for appropriate amendments to the State Records Act. I want to make it very clear that the government does not come into this chamber and say the State Records Act in its current form is perfect for contemporary circumstances; in fact, we have made it very clear by commissioning the review by Mr Moss that we recognise the act needs to be made contemporary. Can I just give a couple of very brief pieces of information that might underscore the point?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000700">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Probably not, because you have 16 seconds left.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2013091150e15a10989a469e90000701">
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU:</by>  Oh, well, never mind.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>