After a whole heap of guff we get a question from the member for Indi, Helen Haines:

After the Robodebt royal commission, the government said never again to the culture of secrecy that allowed it to happen in the first place. The royal commission into road at recommended repealing section 34 of the FOI act, yet the Freedom of information Bill before the House will conceal even more information from the public.

Why is government expanding cabinet secrecy when the royal commission recommended the exact opposite?

Michelle Rowland takes this as the AG:

I thank the member for her question and the way in which she has engaged on this matter. I must respectfully say that the premise of the honorable member’s question is not correct.

I would point out that the benefit of the house, Mr Speaker, but it was this government that initiated a royal commission into robodebt, because we understand the importance of restoring integrity to what was an illegal scheme that destroyed lives and secondly, and weeks ago, we as a government announced the single largest class action settlement in Australian history to bring that sordid matter to a close.

I will say in relation to the cabinet exemption of which the honorable member asks, these changes are designed to clarify existing exemptions. That is to make sure they are consistent with their original policy intent.

So they are applied when they should be applied and cannot be applied where they should not be applied.

The cabinet exemption is being amended to clarify its operation and ensure it appropriately protects information central to the cabinet process which is consistent with its original intent. Speaking of robodebt, to address the concern that was raised in the 2023 royal commission into robodebt, the amendments would also make it absolutely clear that merely labeling something cabinet and confidence does not make it so.

That is a fundamental part of this legislation that is proposed. I would also point out that the proposed amendments are consistent with provisions that already exist in a number of state jurisdictions.

I want to make it clear because honorable member has asked about robodebt that the government accepted or accepted in principle all 56 recommendations made by the royal commission. In relation to the closing observation made by the royal commission about the cabinet exemption, the government stated that it is critical that the cabinet, decision-making body of government, as comprehensively informed in all its deliberations because taken by the cabinet are collective.

On the principle of collective responsibility requires that ministers should be able to express their views frankly in cabinet meetings, in the expectation they can argue freely in private while maintaining unity in public when those decisions have been reached. This in turn requires that opinions expressed in the cabinet and cabinet committees including documents and in any correspondence are treated as confidential.