HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-02-15 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:54): I rise today to speak about an issue that should be of concern to all South Australians, that is, the unnecessary secrecy that prevents the community being able to meaningfully engage important government decisions, especially in relation to planning and the environment. The reason this is an important topic is that access to information is the starting point for any meaningful engagement by citizens in decision making.

Let's start with planning, in particular, the idea of rezoning land or changing the rules against which individual development applications are assessed. This is the process commonly known as a DPA (Development Plan Amendment). Despite some improvements recently, it is still very difficult to access background information and very difficult to access the submissions and reports from government agencies, and even from independent statutory bodies. These submissions are not published and, generally, the only way to get them is through freedom of information or off the back of a truck.

So: why are they kept secret? Why should the public not know, for example, what the EPA has had to say about rezoning of land for housing adjacent to industrial land? One answer is that this information can be embarrassing. We know from evidence presented to the Select Committee on Land Uses on Lefevre Peninsula recently that the EPA's advice is not followed in 70 to 80 per cent of cases in relation to ministerial DPAs. The EPA does fare a little bit better with local council DPAs, with about 75 per cent of their suggestions taken up.

The point is that all of this happens behind closed doors. No doubt, the view in government is that, if they are going to ignore the experts, they may as well keep that fact a secret. The situation is much the same if you are trying to get information about individual development applications. Despite provisions in the Development Act and the development regulations about registers of applications and the ability for people to access and get copies of documents, the reality is that secrecy still reigns supreme.

I think it is outrageous that local councils or the Development Assessment Commission are allowed to withhold plans and other documents that contain important information and details about proposed developments because, if you do not know what is proposed, it is very difficult to make an informed assessment about the impact of the development on your local environment. I had the experience last week of visiting the Development Assessment Commission to try to get copies of the current application for the subdivision of Torrens Island for industrial development.

I should say at the outset that, on those occasions I do venture over to Roma Mitchell House seeking documents, I am always very courteously and professionally received, usually by a senior staff member, and they try to satisfy my requests. However, like all bureaucracies, they have developed their own practices and procedures and their own systems, and they have worked out their own interpretations of the legislation, and, in my experience, they err on the side of secrecy rather than disclosure, especially in relation to development applications that have not been advertised.

What that means is that I can get a copy of the covering letter in relation to the Torrens Island application, but I cannot get a copy of the plan itself and I cannot get a copy of the comments from the various agencies, including the Coastal Protection Branch, native vegetation and SA Heritage. I know that if I lodge a freedom of information application I will get those documents, because that is what I did last time, but the question is: why should I, or any member of the public, have to jump through those hoops to find out what is going on?

Local councils, on the whole, are actually worse than the Development Assessment Commission, because the developers often browbeat staff to make sure that they do not disclose plans or documents. They use excuses such as 'intellectual property' to prevent the public knowing what is going on. I will give the example of the recent Surf Music Festival and pro surfing event held at Vivonne Bay recently.

This does not relate to a planning application, but this was an important event: it has been raised recently in relation to the bailout. It took me many requests to get a copy of their environmental management plan, and I still could not get it. I sent emails and made phone calls in person. I had to lodge a freedom of information application. When it came back it had this rider attached to it. This is what accompanied the Vivonne Bay environmental threat management document. It says:

In releasing this document, I would like to take the opportunity to remind you that the document is the property of Surfing South Australia and should not be further distributed or copied to any person or organisation without the written consent of that organisation.

What a load of rubbish! What a load of codswallop! I tell the Department of Environment now that I will be giving a copy to the Wilderness Society, I will be giving a copy to ecoACTION and I will be giving a copy to the Conservation Council. The government really needs to lift its game in relation to making information available to the public.

Time expired.

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