Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Act 2013

Overview

The Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Act 2013 was enacted by the Parliament of Australia to amend the Parliamentary Service Act 1999, specifically addressing the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 1982. This Act aims to clarify that certain Departments of the Parliament and office holders established under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 are not considered prescribed authorities for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 1982. The objective is to ensure that these entities are not subject to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 1982, thereby maintaining certain operational and procedural confidentiality within the parliamentary framework. This Act commenced on the day it received Royal Assent, effectively integrating these amendments into the existing legislative structure.

Scope and Application

The Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Act 2013 amends the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 by modifying the scope of prescribed authorities under the Freedom of Information Act 1982. This Act applies to Departments of the Parliament that are established under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 and individuals who hold or perform duties of offices established under the same Act. By specifying these entities and roles, the Act aims to exclude them from being considered prescribed authorities for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 1982. The exclusion is retrospective, meaning that these entities and individuals are treated as if they had never been prescribed authorities since their establishment under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999. The amendments ensure that the Freedom of Information Act 1982 does not apply to these specified departments and office holders, thereby clarifying their operational scope and the transparency obligations they are exempt from.

Key Provisions

The Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Act 2013 (the Act) introduces significant amendments to the Parliamentary Service Act 1999, particularly concerning the application of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). The main operative sections of this Act (Schedule 1) include the insertion of a new section 68A, which explicitly states that Departments of the Parliament and office holders established under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 are not considered prescribed authorities for the purposes of the FOI Act (section 68A(a) and (b)). This means that these entities are not subject to the requirements of the FOI Act, such as the obligation to release documents upon request. The Act imposes obligations on the entities it governs by clearly delineating which parts of the Parliamentary Service are exempt from FOI Act requirements. This delineation is intended to protect certain operational aspects of the Parliament from public scrutiny under the FOI Act. This exemption is a significant change, as it retroactively applies to all Departments established under the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 and all individuals holding or performing duties in these offices (section 1(a) and (b)). This ensures that from the time these Departments and offices were established, they were not subject to FOI Act provisions, thereby protecting their operations from potential FOI requests. The Act does not explicitly state any new offences or penalties for breaches of its provisions. However, the implications of not adhering to the Act's stipulations could lead to legal challenges regarding the interpretation and application of FOI Act exemptions. Any entity or individual who attempts to apply the FOI Act to Departments or office holders covered by this Act could face legal consequences, as the Act clarifies the non-applicability of FOI Act provisions to these entities. The maximum penalties for such breaches are not explicitly stated in the Act, but they would likely align with the penalties outlined in the FOI Act, including fines and imprisonment for serious breaches. The precise nature and severity of these penalties would depend on the specific circumstances of the breach and the subsequent legal proceedings.