Minister's rules
1.1 The Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) are concerned that
the Minister's rules on the exercise of the Secretary's public interest
disclosure power will not be made public before they are finalised and
introduced in parliament. This will not allow interested third parties to
consider the rules, and raise any concerns they might have. NXT are aware that
as the rules are a legislative instrument they cannot be disallowed in part. If
any aspect of the rules has to be altered after they have been introduced, the
whole instrument has to be disallowed. This process does not appear to be best
practice, particularly given the nature of the information that could be the
subject of public disclosure by the Secretary.
Recommendation
1.2 The NXT recommends that the Minister's rules be
made publically available prior to senators voting on them.
Consulting with stakeholders
1.3 During the public hearing Senator Kakoschke-Moore
questioned Mr Timothy Pilgrim, Australian Information Commissioner and
Australian Privacy Commissioner from the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner, about the Office's input in the design of the rules.
Senator KAKOSCHKE-MOORE: Have you had the opportunity
to provide even just some broad guidance to DVA and the Department of Defence
about what should be in these rules?
Mr Pilgrim: Not at this stage. We have only recently
become aware of the detail of this bill and, as I was saying earlier, in
particular through the submission put in by the Department of Veterans Affairs,
the rationale behind some of the areas they want to disclose, which is why I
was offering our services up to see if we cannot help write those rules.[1]
1.4 Senator Kakoschke-Moore put the same question to
the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman during the public hearing.
Senator KAKOSCHKE-MOORE: If you were given the
opportunity would your office also appreciate the chance to review the rules
before they were put in place?
Ms Gibb: I think that would be good. We all in
Commonwealth roles deal with vulnerable clients, and I think in this case we
would be interested to at least put forward some suggestions on how those
clients could be handled. So, yes, if we were asked we would be happy to
provide some assistance.[2]
1.5 The NXT are concerned that relevant stakeholders
have not been consulted during the drafting process for the rules, and support
the Chair's recommendation that the Department of Veterans' Affairs consult
with the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner on the content of the Minister's rules.
1.6 The NXT also strongly supports the recommendation
in the majority report that a privacy impact assessment be conducted to
identify and manage privacy risks associated with the bill.
Automated decision making
1.7 NXT acknowledges that that automated decision
making is a useful process designed to speed up the claims process, but notes
the importance of the system working correctly. NXT have concerns about the
automated process and the impact incorrect decisions may have on vulnerable veterans.
As confirmed by DVA at the public hearing, DVA do not have a usable computer
system at this time.[3]
1.8 NXT wish to note the importance of a fully
functioning automated decision process, as supported by a high quality computer
system, if DVA is to achieve reductions in claims processing times.
1.9 It is also unclear how DVA's 'own motion' review
of claims subject to automated decision making will work in practice. Given the
serious concerns that have been raised around Centrelink's debt recovery system,
it is critical that the automated decision making proposed by DVA is subject to
robust review.
Senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page