<!--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>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2007-11-13" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="1195" />
  <endPage num="1249" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Answers to Questions</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Freedom of Information</name>
      <page num="1221" />
      <text id="20071113430b787e350d408190000506">
        <heading>FREEDOM OF INFORMATION</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="603" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. R.D. LAWSON</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2007-11-13">
            <name>FREEDOM OF INFORMATION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <text id="20071113430b787e350d408190000507">In reply to <by role="member" id="603">the Hon. R.D. LAWSON</by> (16 November 2006).</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2007-11-13">
            <name>FREEDOM OF INFORMATION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <text id="20071113430b787e350d408190000508">
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning):</by>  The Minister for Finance has provided the following information:</text>
        <text id="20071113430b787e350d408190000509">1.&amp;#x9;I am advised Agencies subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1991 (FOI Act) claimed parliamentary privilege as a ground for refusing access to documents in the financial year 2005-06 on seven occasions.</text>
        <text id="20071113430b787e350d408190000510">2.&amp;#x9;The Freedom of Information Management System (FOIMS), which is the electronic database used to derive the FOI annual statistics, reports on how many times agencies claim an exemption clause in Schedule 1 of the FOI Act. Specific subclauses, such as 17(c), are not separately reported. Amending the FOIMS database would require specific funding. Considering agencies only claimed the parliamentary privilege exemption seven times during the last reporting year, I do not believe it is necessary to amend the database to collect such a small statistic.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>