HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-09-20 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

REAL PROPERTY (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 18 September 2012.)

The Hon. S.G. WADE (16:04): I rise on behalf of the Liberal opposition to indicate our support for the Real Property (Access to Information) Amendment Bill 2012. On 26 August 2012, the Attorney-General, John Rau, wrote to the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Heysen (Isobel Redmond) providing a forewarning to the introduction of the Real Property (Access to Information) Amendment Bill 2012.

I know that the Hon. Mark Parnell is so tempted to interject that this is the second example—two bills in a row where the government has not complied with normal parliamentary protocols. The Attorney requested that standing orders of the house be suspended on 4 September in order for the bill to be introduced on the same day as notice was given. This was despite the fact that it was drafted over two years ago on 19 August 2010. Yet, the government provided the opposition a week to consider it.

We support the need to expeditiously progress the bill through the parliament to minimise the risk of publicising the fact that the information about individuals at risk is presently accessible. However, we would remind the council that the bill had been drafted for over two years and, as I will indicate later, had been under discussion for 10. The need for expeditious passage through this parliament is clear, but the opportunities for briefing and consultation prior to its introduction were not taken up by the government.

This bill addresses the need for some names on the South Australian land information system to be suppressed. The registrar has received correspondence from individuals concerned that their residential address details may be accessible via a name search on the registry. The Liberal opposition recognises the real concern for privacy amongst individuals such as victims of domestic violence, officers of the South Australian police force and court officials. We believe it is appropriate that an individual is able to suppress their details on the South Australian land information system and keep their details confidential when their safety is at risk.

The bill allows at-risk individuals to apply to the Registrar-General for their details to be suppressed. If the Registrar-General is satisfied that allowing those details to remain searchable would place the individual's (or another individual's) safety at risk, the Registrar-General may take measures that they see fit to prevent or restrict access to those particulars. I remind the council that similar suppression powers are available under the Electoral Act, the Emergency Services Funding Act and the Local Government Act 1999. Importantly and appropriately, companies, associations and other incorporated bodies are not eligible for the suppression service.

We are advised that the change will cost approximately $50,000 and will take six months to implement. I commend the government for the fact that, unlike Western Australia, this service will be available without charge. The Attorney-General has consulted with the Registrar-General and, as a result, the procedure in this bill was selected from a range of options. The consultation occurred between July 2002 and February 2004; that is, eight to 10 years ago. Considerable time has passed and it is clear that this government has not progressed this issue in a timely manner.

Of the 57 consultation letters, briefing papers and questionnaires that the government sent out as part of its consultation, only 38 per cent of respondents supported the suppression of names. Fifty-seven per cent were of the view that, if the suppression of details was introduced, it should be determined by the judiciary and 29 thought it should be done by the Registrar-General. Seventy-three per cent of government agency responses indicated they had no alternative information other than names to search for the information they required. This is likely to have a significant impact, as 88 per cent of agencies indicated that they conducted name searches.

The government has known about this issue for years and the opposition regrets that it has been so slow to address the issue. Nonetheless, the bill is commendable and is supported by the opposition.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion, Minister for Social Housing, Minister for Disabilities, Minister for Youth, Minister for Volunteers) (16:09): I thank the Hon. Mr Wade for his comments and his indication of support and I look forward to the speedy passage of the bill.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion, Minister for Social Housing, Minister for Disabilities, Minister for Youth, Minister for Volunteers) (16:11): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT