FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (14:59): I seek leave to make an explanation prior to directing a question to the minister representing the minister for manufacturing on the subject of freedom of information.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: Mr President, as you would know, and members would know, minister Koutsantonis is well known as being the only MP who doesn't pay up his gambling debts to other members of parliament after a particular gambling exchange. At the end of last year, on 23 December I issued a freedom of information request looking for a ministerial credit card expense as attributed to or expended by minister Koutsantonis.

In early February this year—in fact, on 6 February this year—I received a determination, amongst which was a receipt of a document of a payment, paid by taxpayers on minister Koutsantonis's behalf, of $70 on 21 July 2010 to an account called the 'Michael Atkinson farewell account'. A subsequent freedom of information request in relation to that found that almost seven months after that expenditure in July 2010, minister Koutsantonis on 2 February, just four days prior to my receiving a freedom of information application response from his department, repaid or reimbursed the amount of $70 that taxpayers had expended on his behalf into the 'Michael Atkinson farewell account'.

Information provided to me indicates that the proposed response to me, which I received on 6 February this year, was provided to the minister just prior to 2 February of this year and, as a result of that proposed FOI response, the minister then decided to reimburse the taxpayers for his tickets to the 'galah' event at the 'Michael Atkinson farewell account'. My questions are:

1. Is it correct that details of the proposed FOI response to me, which I received on 6 February this year, were provided to the minister just prior to 2 February and just prior to the release of the departmental response to me?

2. Did the minister feel guilty that he had used taxpayer funds to pay for tickets to a farewell function for Michael Atkinson, and was that the reason why, almost seven months after using taxpayer funds and just before the public release of that fact through the freedom of information request, that he hurriedly repaid the amount to taxpayers? If that is not the reason, what was the reason for the minister, almost seven months after expending that money, repaying the account to the department?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (15:03): I thank the honourable member for his questions and will refer them to the minister for manufacturing in another place and bring back a response. As all honourable members know in this place, the management of FOI information, and the content that is released to applicants, is independent of ministers and their officers. It is a system that is completely independent. The decisions about what constitutes material that is relevant to an application is assessed by independent FOI officers and is independent of ministers.

Ministers are not in a position to be able to interfere with or have a say in, for that matter, the content of materials released under FOI applications. Honourable members know that. They know that we conduct this process at arm's distance to government, that it is an independent process, and that is to ensure that the integrity of the system is upheld. But, as I said, in relation to the specific questions asked by the Hon. Rob Lucas, I am happy to refer those to the minister for manufacturing and bring back a response.