Our reference: FOI 23-279
Dr Andrew Terhorst
by email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Dr Terhorst
Decision on your Freedom of Information Request
I refer to your request of 16 May 2023, to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development,
Communications and the Arts (the Department), seeking access to documents under the
Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
1
Your request
You requested access to:
“Pursuant to my interest in the Hobart Airport Master Plan 2022 approved by Minister King, I hereby
formally request the disclosure of all relevant public submissions related to this plan. Additionally, I am
seeking access to the detailed briefing notes presented to the Minister, with particular attention to
public grievances, notably those germane to the effects of aircraft noise and environmental
disturbances beyond the immediate confines of the airport property”
2
Authority to make decision
I am authorised by the Secretary to make decisions in relation to Freedom of Information requests under
section 23(1) of the FOI Act.
3
Decision
I have identified five documents that are relevant to your request. These documents were in the possession of
the Department when your request was received.
I have decided to:
• grant access in full to relevant information in three documents
• grant partial access to two documents
A schedule setting out the documents relevant to your request, with my decision in relation to those
documents, is at
ATTACHMENT A.
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
1800 075 001 infrastructure.gov.au | arts.gov.au
4 Finding of facts and reasons for decision
My findings of fact and reasons for deciding that exemptions apply to the parts of documents relevant to your
request are set out below.
4.1 Section 47F – Documents affecting personal privacy
Section 47F of the FOI Act provides that a document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure would involve the
unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person).
Personal Information
Personal information has the same meaning as in the Privacy Act. Specifically, section 6 of the Privacy Act
provides that
personal information means information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an
individual who is reasonably identifiable whether the information or opinion is true or not; and whether the
information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.
Paragraph 6.131 of the FOI Guidelines states that for particular information to be personal information, an
individual must be identified or reasonably identifiable.
Paragraph 6.130 of the FOI Guidelines states that personal information can include a person’s name, address,
telephone number, date of birth, medical records, bank account details, taxation information and signature.
An individual is a natural person rather than a corporation, trust, body politic or incorporated association.
I am satisfied that parts of the documents marked ‘s47F’ includes personal information about a number of
individuals.
Unreasonable Disclosure of Personal Information
Section 47F(2) of the FOI Act provides that, in determining whether the disclosure would involve the
unreasonable disclosure of personal information, I must have regard to the following matters:
(a)
the extent to which the information is well known
(b)
whether the person to whom the information relates is known to be (or to have been) associated
with the matters dealt with in the document
(c)
the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources
(d)
any other matters that the agency or Minister considers relevant.
Paragraph 6.138 of the FOI Guidelines states that:
The personal privacy exemption is designed to prevent the unreasonable invasion of third parties’
privacy. The test of ‘unreasonableness’ implies a need to balance the public interest in disclosure of
government-held information and the private interest in the privacy of individuals. The test does not,
however, amount to the public interest test of s 11A(5), which follows later in the decision making
process. It is possible that the decision maker may need to consider one or more factors twice, once to
determine if a projected effect is unreasonable and again when assessing the public interest balance.
I note that the AAT, in
Re Chandra and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs [1984] AATA 437 at paragraph
259, stated that:
2
... whether a disclosure is ‘unreasonable’ requires … a consideration of all the circumstances, including
the nature of the information that would be disclosed, the circumstances in which the information was
obtained, the likelihood of the information being information that the person concerned would not wish
to have disclosed without consent, and whether the information has any current relevance … it is also
necessary in my view to take into consideration the public interest recognised by the Act in the disclosure
of information … and to weigh that interest in the balance against the public interest in protecting the
personal privacy of a third party ...
Paragraphs 6.142 and 6.143 of the FOI Guidelines state:
6.142
Key factors for determining whether disclosure is unreasonable include:
the author of the document is identifiable
the documents contain third party personal information
release of the documents would cause stress on the third party
no public purpose would be achieved through release
6.143
As discussed in the leading s 47F IC review decision of
‘FG’ and National Archives of Australia
[2015] AICmr 26, other factors considered to be relevant include:
the nature, age and current relevance of the information
any detriment that disclosure may cause to the person to whom the information relates
any opposition to disclosure expressed or likely to be held by that person
the circumstances of an agency’s col ection and use of the information
the fact that the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination
of information released under the FOI Act
any submission an FOI applicant chooses to make in support of their application as to their
reasons for seeking access and their intended or likely use or dissemination of the
information, and
whether disclosure of the information might advance the public interest in government
transparency and integrity
I am satisfied that the disclosure of personal information contained within the documents would, in the
circumstances, constitute an unreasonable disclosure of personal information for the following reasons:
• the conditionally exempt personal information is not well known
• the person to whom the personal information relates is not known to be (or to have been) associated with
the matters dealt with in the document
• the conditionally exempt personal information is not available from publicly accessible sources
• the individuals whose personal information is contained in the document are identifiable
• release of this information would cause stress to the individuals concerned
• no further public purpose would be achieved through the release of the personal information
• the information is current and has not lost its sensitivity through the passage of time
• the individuals would not expect the information to be placed in the public domain, and detriment may be
caused to the individuals to whom the information relates, and
• the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination of information released under
the FOI Act.
3
I have consulted with affected third parties regarding the disclosure of their personal information, and I have
considered any concerns raised by those individuals during the course of making my decision.
For the reasons outlined above, I decided that the parts of the documents marked ‘s47F’ are conditionally
exempt from disclosure under section 47F of the FOI Act.
Where information is found to be conditionally exempt, I must give access to that information unless access at
this time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. I have addressed the public interest
considerations below.
4.2 Public interest considerations
Pursuant to section 11A(5) of the FOI Act, I must give access to conditionally exempt information unless access
to that information at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. I have therefore
considered whether disclosure of the conditionally exempt information would be contrary to the public interest.
I note that paragraph 6.5 of the FOI Guidelines states that the public interest test is considered to be:
• something that is of serious concern or benefit to the public, not merely of individual interest
• not something of interest to the public, but in the interest of the public
• not a static concept, where it lies in a particular matter will often depend on a balancing of interests
• necessarily broad and non-specific and
• relates to matters of common concern or relevance to all members of the public, or a substantial
section of the public.
Factors favouring disclosure
Section 11B of the FOI Act provides that factors favouring access to conditionally exempt information in the
public interest include whether access to that information would do any of the following:
• promote the objects of the FOI Act (including all matters set out in sections 3 and 3A)
• inform debate on a matter of public importance
• promote effective oversight of public expenditure
• allow a person to access his or her own personal information.
Having regard to the above, I consider that disclosure of the conditionally exempt information at this time:
• would provide access to documents held by an agency of the Commonwealth which would promote
the objects of the FOI Act by providing the Australian community with access to information held by
the Australian Government.
• would not inform debate on a matter of public importance
• would not promote effective oversight of public expenditure
• would not allow you access to your own personal information.
Factors weighing against disclosure
I consider that the following factors weigh against disclosure of the conditionally exempt information at this
time, on the basis that disclosure:
• could reasonably be expected to prejudice the protection of a number of individuals’right to personal
privacy
4
o The Department is committed to complying with its obligations under the
Privacy Act 1988, which
sets out standards and obligations that regulate how we must handle and manage personal
information. I consider it is firmly in the public interest that we uphold the rights of individuals to
their own privacy and meet our statutory obligations under the Privacy Act.
o I note that the substance of the information that is relevant to your request has been released to
you and disclosure of the personal information would not provide you with any further insight into
the workings of government beyond that substantive information.
In making my decision, I have not taken into account any of the irrelevant factors set out in section 11B(4) of
the FOI Act, which are:
(e)
access to the conditionally exempt information could result in embarrassment to the
Commonwealth Government, or cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government
(f)
access to the conditionally exempt information could result in any person misinterpreting or
misunderstanding that information
(g)
the author of the document was (or is) of high seniority in the agency to which the request for
access to the document was made
(h)
access to the conditionally exempt information could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
Conclusion – disclosure is not in the public interest
For the reasons set out above, after weighing all public interest factors for and against disclosure, I decided
that, on balance, disclosure of the conditionally exempt information would be contrary to the public interest. I
am satisfied that the benefit to the public resulting from disclosure of the conditionally exempt information is
outweighed by the benefit to the public of withholding that information.
4.3 Section 22 – deletion of irrelevant and/or exempt material
Section 22 of the FOI Act applies to documents containing irrelevant and/or exempt material and allows an
agency to delete such material from a document.
I decided that the documents captured by your request contain material which can reasonably be regarded as
irrelevant to your request. As such, an edited copy of those documents has been prepared in accordance with
section 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act. This information is marked ‘s22’ in the documents released to you.
The documents contain personal identifiers of public servants. When your request was acknowledged, we
notified you that personal information of public servants below the SES level and all email addresses, signatures
and direct telephone numbers would be considered irrelevant to the scope of your request unless you told us
that you were expressly seeking access to that information. On the basis that you did not notify us otherwise,
I decided this information is irrelevant to your request and it has been deleted under section 22 of the FOI Act
as outlined above.
In addition, as I have decided that some information you have requested is exempt from disclosure, I have
prepared an edited copy of the documents being released by deleting the exempt information under
section 22(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act.
5
5
Material taken into consideration
In making my decision, I had regard to the following:
• the terms of your request
• the content of the documents captured by your request
• the provisions of the FOI Act
• the guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act (the FOI
Guidelines)
• advice from departmental officers with responsibility for the subject matter contained in the documents
captured by your request
• submissions from third parties consulted about documents which contain information concerning them
6
Legislative provisions
The FOI Act, including the provisions referred to in my decision, are available on the Federal Register of
Legislation website: www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A02562.
7
Your review rights
Your review rights in relation to this decision are set out at
ATTACHMENT B.
8
Publication of material released under the FOI Act
Where I have decided to release documents to you, we may also publish the released material on our Disclosure
Log. We will not publish personal or business affairs information where it would be unreasonable to do so.
For your reference our Disclosure Log can be found here: www.infrastructure.gov.au/about-us/freedom-
information/freedom-information-disclosure-log.
Further information
Yours sincerely
Digitally signed by: McClure Phil
DN: CN = McClure Phil OU =
McClure PhilWinX Users, WinX Azure
Date: 2023.08.14 10:52:28 +10'00'
Phil McClure
Assistant Secretary
Airports Branch
Domestic Aviation & Reform Division
Date: 14 August 2023
6
ATTACHMENT A.
SCHEDULE OF DOCUMENTS FOI 23-279
Doc Date of
Description of document
Num of Decision on access
Provision
No. document
Pages
of FOI
Act
1.
06 March
Minister Brief - Hobart Airport draft
16
Access granted in full
s22
2023
Master Plan 2022, with Attachments
to relevant
information
2.
20 December Hobart Airport 2022 Master Plan
23
Access granted in part s22
2022
s47F
Attachment A – Email
2
Access granted in part
s22
s47F
3.
26 October
Email correspondence
2
Access granted in part
s22
2023
s47F
4.
06 March
Assessment – Hobart Airport draft
7
Access granted in full
2023
Master Plan 2022
5.
06 March
Assessment – Hobart Airport draft
23
Access granted in full
2023
Master Plan 2022
7
ATTACHMENT B.
YOUR REVIEW RIGHTS
If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may apply for a review of it.
Internal review
You can request an internal review within 30 days of receiving this decision. An internal review will be conducted
by a different departmental officer from the original decision-maker.
No particular form is required to apply for review although it will assist the Department if you are able to set
out the grounds on which you believe that the original decision should be changed.
Applications for internal review can be sent to xxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
If you choose to seek an internal review, you will also have a right to apply for Information Commissioner review
(IC review) of the internal review decision once it has been provided to you if you remain dissatisfied with the
decision.
Information Commissioner review or complaint
You have the right to seek a review by the Information Commissioner of this decision.
An application for IC review must be made in writing to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) within 60 days of the decision.
If you are not satisfied with the way we have handled your FOI request, you can lodge a complaint with the
OAIC. However, the OAIC suggests that complaints are made to the agency in the first instance.
More information about the Information Commissioner reviews and complaints is available on the OAIC website
here: www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-review-process.
8
