House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Confidentiality Agreements Confidentiality Agreements Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly MacKillop Confidentiality Agreements Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (15:03): My question again is to the Minister for Health. Is the minister not concerned that the lack of accountability afforded by the practice of hiding failures behind confidentiality agreements is building a culture of mediocrity within his agency? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Asking a minister whether or not he is concerned gives the minister a great deal of scope. Deputy Premier. The Hon. J.R. RAU House of Assembly Enfield Deputy Premier Attorney-General Minister for Justice Reform Minister for Planning Minister for Industrial Relations Minister for Child Protection Reform Minister for the Public Sector Minister for Consumer and Business Services Minister for the City of Adelaide The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for Consumer and Business Services, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (15:04): I think it's important for members to understand, as I was trying to explain before, that the standard situation is that these matters would generally be resolved on the basis of a number of standard clauses, including that each party agrees to go away and not further agitate the matter with the other party, and the confidentiality clauses are the standard. There may be many, many reasons why they are there. For instance, insurance companies regularly require confidentiality provisions because they don't want to have the arrangements that they enter into with people who are claiming under the insurance policies given to other members of the public who may or may not use that to some advantage. Likewise, there are some people—and I'm talking here about a plaintiff or a complainant—who are complainants or plaintiffs who actually do not want, for very good reason, to have the terms and conditions of the settlement they have reached with an insurer, or in this case the Crown, to be put out into the broader public domain. I can give an example because that might be of assistance. Some people who are involved in these types of claims might not want an estranged partner, or other members of the family or business colleagues or any other people, to know they are about to receive money or indeed to know the amount of that money. They may not want to see their face in the newspaper and the details of their personal business put into the public domain, and of course it's entirely reasonable that they should feel that way. I don't think anyone should imply that the standards which are applied here are used for any purpose other than the general purpose one sees used in normal standard litigation.