link to page 1
OFFICIAL
Freedom of Information (FOI) request
Notice of Decision
Reference: FOI/2024/342
John Smith
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Smith
I refer to your request to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (the Department) under
the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act), received on 19 October 2024.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request for access under the
FOI Act.
Request decided out of time
A decision on your request was due 17 January 2025. Unfortunately the Department was unable to
complete the processing of your request by the due date. In these circumstances the Department
follows the Guidelines issued by the Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act
(the Guidelines) which states:
Where an access refusal decision is deemed to have been made before a substantive
decision is made, the agency or minister continues to have an obligation to provide a
statement of reasons on the FOI request.1
Scope of request
You set out your request in the following terms:
I am writing to request any available documents pertaining to His Majesty The King's
flag for Australia, as well as a high-resolution image of the flag for educational purposes.
I understand that the flag was recently updated and used during the monarch's 2024
royal tour. Your assistance in providing these materials would be greatly appreciated.
Paragraph 3.161 of the Guidelines
Postal Address: PO Box 6500, CANBERRA ACT 2600
Telephone: +61 2 6271 5849 Fax: +61 2 6271 5776 www.pmc.gov.au ABN: 18 108 001 191
1
link to page 2
OFFICIAL
On 14 November 2024, you provided the following clarification:
I am requesting a more focused set of documents, specifically those pertaining to the flag design
approval on August 30, 2024, and the flag's detailed specifications. Additionally, the flag's image
on the Department's website is of low quality. Could you please provide a high-resolution image
of the flag, or preferably, a vector graphic in AI, CDR, EPS, PDF, or SVG
format?
Authorised decision-maker
I am authorised to make this decision in accordance with arrangements approved by the
Department’s Secretary under section 23 of the FOI Act.
Material taken into account
In reaching my decision I referred to the following:
• the terms of your request
• the FOI Act
• the Guidelines issued by the Information Commission
er2 (the Guidelines)
•
Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and Summers (Freedom of information)
[2019] AATA 5537
• The views of a third party consulted on the application of section 33
Documents in scope of request
The Department has identified eight documents that fall within the scope of your request.
These documents are set out in the Schedule of Documents at Attachment A.
Decision
I have decided to grant access in full to two documents, refuse access in full to five documents, and
grant access in part to one document.
Material has been identified as exempt or irrelevant on grounds the documents contain information
exempt under:
• section 22 of the FOI Act – access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted;
• section 33 of the FOI Act – documents affecting international relations; and
• section 47E(d) of the FOI Act – certain operations of agencies.
2 s 93A of the FOI Act
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
2
link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3
OFFICIAL
Reason for decision
My findings of fact and reasons for deciding that certain information is exempt or irrelevant is set out
below.
1.
Section 33(a)(iii) – Exemption – documents affecting international relations
Section 33(a) of the FOI Act provides:
A document is an exempt document if disclosure of the document under this Act:
(a)
would, or could reasonably be expected to, cause damage to:
(i)
The security of the Commonwealth;
(ii)
The defence of the Commonwealth; or
(iii)
the international relations of the Commonwealth
The Guidelines explain:
The test ‘would or could reasonably be expected’ … requires a decision maker to assess
the likelihood of the predicted or forecast event, effect or damage occurring after
disclosure of a document. The use of the word ‘could’ in this qualification is less stringent than ‘would’ and requires
analysis of the reasonable expectation rather than certainty of an event, effect or
damage occurring.3
Furthermore:
the phrase ‘international relations’, means the ability of the Australian Government to
maintain good working relations with other governments and international
organisations and to protect the flow of confidential information between them.4
‘Damage’ for the purpose of this exemption is not confined to monetary or physical loss or
damage, but may be intangible.5
The Guidelines acknowledge the disclosure of a document may diminish the trust and confidence in
which another country would have in Australia as a reliable recipient of its confidential information
and may be less willing to cooperate with the Commonwealth in the future.
6
Documents 1-3, 5 and 8 are documents containing correspondence with or information
communicated from a foreign entity. In the circumstances the Guidelines relevantly address the
application of the section 33 to this type of document:
3 Paragraphs 5.15 – 5.18 of the Guidelines
4 Paragraph 5.39 of the Guidelines
5 Paragraph 5.25 of the Guidelines
6 Paragraph 5.42 of the Guidelines
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
3
link to page 4 link to page 4
OFFICIAL
… the AAT has accepted evidence of a long-standing convention and practice of
confidentiality with respect to correspondence between the Australian Government and
the Queen [the confidentiality convention]. This convention preserves the effective
functioning of the relationship between the Commonwealth of Australia and the
Monarch, including relations with the Queen personally and members of the Royal
Household, including the Queen’s private secretary. In these circumstances, the AAT
found that disclosure of letters between Australian Prime Ministers and the Queen could
reasonably be expected to damage the international relations of the Commonwealth.7
I have had regard to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision in
Secretary, Department of Prime
Minister and Cabinet and Summers (Freedom of information),8 in particular:
•
The expectation on the part of the Monarch and the Royal Household that the confidentiality
convention will be strictly observed;
•
Disclosure would breach the confidentiality convention and be viewed as such; and
•
Damage which could reasonably be expected to flow from disclosure of the Letters for Australia’s
relationship with the Monarch and Royal Household.
The Department consulted the Royal Household regarding their information in the documents
captured by this FOI request. The Royal Household confirmed their position for the confidentiality
conventions to be strictly observed, and they preserved a claim on the confidentiality of their material.
I am satisfied disclosure of the documents and material (as set out in the schedule) would reasonably
be expected to damage the international relations of the Commonwealth if disclosed.
I am satisfied the material and documents are exempt under section 33(a)(iii) of the FOI Act.
2.
Section 47E(d) – Public interest conditional exemption – Certain operations of agencies
Section 47E provides:
A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or could reasonably be
expected to, do any of the following:
a. prejudice the effectiveness of procedures or methods for the conduct of tests,
examinations or audits by an agency;
b. prejudice the attainment of objects of particular tests, examinations or audits
conducted by an agency;
c. have a substantial adverse effect on the management or assessment of
personnel by the Commonwealth or by an agency;
7 Paragraph 5.41 of the Guidelines
8 Secretary, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and Summers (Freedom of information) [2019] AATA
5537 (20 December 2019)
https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/AATA/2019/5537.html
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
4
link to page 5 link to page 5
OFFICIAL
d. have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the
operations of an agency.
The Guidelines explain a decision maker is required to assess whether the ‘the predicted effects needs
to be reasonably expected to occur’.
9
Document 4 is a high resolution copy of The King’s Flag for Australia. The Honours and Symbols
Section of the Department is responsible for ensuring the use and reproduction of Royal Imagery and
Symbols is only undertaken with express permission from the Royal Household.
The release of the material would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient
conduct of the operations of the Department as it would undermine the integrity of Royal Imagery
and Symbols, which are managed according to the requirements of the Royal Household.
The King’s Flag for Australia is a Royal Symbol and is reserved for the exclusive use of His Majesty The
King while he is visiting Australia. It is used to depict His Majesty’s presence in vehicles, boats or
aircraft he travels in, and buildings or premises His Majesty visits or stays in, while in Australia.
Disclosure is expected to increase the risk of the King’s Flag for Australia being misappropriated or
misused. This is because publishing a higher resolution file would allow for uncontrolled and
unrestricted reproduction of The King’s Flag for Australia, which could reasonably be expected to
diminish the significance of the Flag as a mechanism to denote that The King’s presence whilst in
Australia. This, in turn, has the potential to risk Australia’s relationship with The Sovereign and the
Royal Household.
Further information on expectations and obligations with respect to Royal Images (including symbols)
can be found at:
https://www.royal.uk/use-of-royal-arms.
I am satisfied that Document 4 is conditionally exempt under section 47E(d) of the FOI Act.
3.
Public interest
The FOI Act requires a conditionally exempt document to be disclosed unless its disclosure would, on
balance, be contrary to the public interest
10. In determining whether its disclosure would be contrary
to the public interest, the FOI Act requires a decision-maker to balance the public interest factors.
As I have decided that parts of the documents are conditionally exempt, I am now required to
consider the public interest factors, in doing so I have not considered the irrelevant factors as set out
in section 11B(4) of the FOI Act.
9 Paragraph 6.92 of the Guidelines
10 section 11A(5)) of the FOI Act
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
5
link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6
OFFICIAL
I have noted the objects of the FOI Act
11 and the factors favouring access as listed in section 11B(3) of
the FOI Act. Having regard to the material before me and the circumstances of the documents found
to be conditionally exempt, I am satisfied of the following:
• access would promote the objects of the FOI Act
12 • in considering whether access to document 4 would inform public debate or provide effective
oversight of public expenditure, I have had regard to the existing publication and procedures in
place for a person to access a suitable copy of The King’s Flag for Australia. In the
circumstances, I do not consider that disclosure would significantly promote these factors.
• I am satisfied that your personal information is not contained within the conditionally exempt
document and therefore s 11B(3)(d) is not a relevant factor to favour access
The FOI Act does not set out any public interest factors against disclosure and require that agencies
are to have regard to the Guidelines to work out if disclosure would, on balance, be contrary to the
public interest
13.
The Guidelines contain a non-exhaustive list of factors that may weigh against disclosure depending
on the circumstances of the documents found to be conditionally exempt.
14
Taking into consideration the documents and circumstances surrounding those documents I find the
following factors against disclosure:
• The disclosure of the conditionally exempt material would have an adverse effect on the
proper and efficient conduct of the agency in supporting the Commonwealth to protect the
use or reproduction of Royal Imagery and Symbols.
• The disclosure of this material would adversely affect the operations of the Department in
relation to the proper custody, usage and production of The King’s Flag of Australia by
increasing the risk of misappropriation or misuse.
• The disclosure would have an adverse effect on our international relations with the Royal
Household.
I note that access to a copy of the Flag hand drawn by the College of Arms artist has been provided
to you as part of this decision. Additionally, a copy of The King’s Flag for Australia is available on our
website.
15
I consider the provision of this information satisfies the public interest and the terms of your request
while promoting the objects of the FOI Act, and that on balance the factors against disclosure for
document 4 outweigh those that may favour access.
11 section 3 of the FOI Act
12 section 11B(3)(a) of the FOI Act
13 section 11B(5) of the FOI Act
14 Paragraph 6.233 of the Guidelines
15 https://www.pmc.gov.au/resources/australian-flags-booklet/part-3-other-official-flags-australia/royal-and-
vice-regal-flags
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
6
link to page 7 link to page 7
OFFICIAL
Accordingly, I am of the view that disclosure of the requested document would be contrary to the
public interest.
4.
Deletion of irrelevant matter
Section 22 of the FOI Act authorises the Department to give access to an edited copy of a document
if giving access to a document would disclose information that would be reasonably regarded as
irrelevant to the request, and it is possible for the Department to prepare an edited copy, modified by
deletions, ensuring that the edited copy would not disclose any information that would reasonably be
regarded as irrelevant to the request.
On 30 October 2024, the Department advised you of its policy to exclude the personal and direct
contact details of officers not in the Senior Executive Service (SES) and any Ministerial staff, as well as
any person’s signature, and the mobile or direct numbers of SES officers, which are contained in
documents that fall within the terms of an FOI request. This category of information is identified as
irrelevant, and documents can be modified by the Department to delete the irrelevant material.
I am satisfied that parts of document 8 are irrelevant under section 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act. The
remaining parts of the document have been released to you as they are relevant to your request.
Review rights
If you disagree with my decision, you may apply for a review with the Information Commissioner.
Information Commissioner review
Under section 54L of the FOI Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to
review my decision. An application for review by the Information Commissioner must be made in
writing within 60 days after the date of this letter. You can apply using the
OAIC Web Form.16
FOI Complaints
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your FOI request, please let us know what we could
have done better. We may be able to rectify the problem. If you are not satisfied with our response,
you can make a complaint to the Australian Information Commissioner. A complaint to the
Information Commissioner must be made in writing. You can make a complaint using the
OAIC Web Form.17
If you wish to discuss any aspect of your requests, you can contact the FOI Section by email at
xxx@xxx.xxx.xx.
16 https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=ICReview&layoutcode=ICReviewWF
17 https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=Complaint&layoutcode=FOIComplaintWF
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
7
OFFICIAL
Yours sincerely
David Belgrove
Assistant Secretary
Parliament, Government and Honours Branch
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
19 November 2025
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
8
