FOI 744 24 25 Outcome of Internal Review.pdf

Reference: FOI 744/24/25

FOI 744/24/25 – INTERNAL REVIEW STATEMENT OF REASONS UNDER THE
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
1.
I refer to the email of 9 May 2025, in which Ray D (the applicant) sought an internal
review under section 54 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) of the Accredited
Decision Maker’s (ADM) decision dated 16 April 2025.
2.
On 8 March 2025, the applicant submitted a request for documents under the FOI Act
to the Department of Defence (Defence) in the following terms:
…any correspondence, including briefs, emails, digital communications and other
documents from the Department of Defence, Royal Australian Air Force, National
Headquarters Australian Air Force Cadets (AAFC), Cadet Branch Air Force, and
KPMG relating to the development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR)
and the Adult Learning Continuum Review (ALCR). Specifically, I want information
related to:

- Budget and expenditure (including, but not limited to, all associated travel,
accommodation, consultancy expenditure, disbursements)
- Decision making
- Stakeholder consultations
- Selection of the "think tank" and other groups, committees, and forums involved in
the development of the CLCR and ALCR
- Communication between Cadet Branch Air Force, National Headquarters AAFC,
and Wing OCs, Wing XOs, and Squadron COs
- Additional correspondence that includes the following personnel: Chief of Air
Force, Deputy Chief of Air Force, DGCADETS-AF, CDR-AAFC, Staff Officer
3.
On 19 March 2025, Defence issued the applicant a formal consultation under section
24AB of the FOI Act on the basis that the work involved in processing the request would
substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
4.
On 30 March 2025, the applicant responded and revised their request to the following:

- Budget and expenditure (including, but not limited to, all associated travel,
accommodation, consultancy expenditure, disbursements) relating to the
development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult
Learning Continuum Review (ALCR).

- Communication between Cadet Branch Air Force, National Headquarters
AAFC, and Wing OCs, Wing XOs, and Squadron COs relating to the
development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult
Learning Continuum Review (ALCR).

- Additional correspondence that includes the following personnel: Chief of Air
Force, Deputy Chief of Air Force, DGCADETS-AF, CDR-AAFC, Staff Officer

Learning Systems, KPMG Engagement Partner, KPMG Director, KPMG
Associate Director, KPMG Manager relating to the development of the Cadet
Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult Learning Continuum Review
(ALCR).
5.
On 16 April 2025, the original decision was provided to the applicant. The original
decision refused the applicant’s request under section 24 of the FOI Act on the basis that the
practical refusal reason still existed.
Contentions
6.
The applicant has requested an internal review of the original decision which refused
their request under section 24 of the FOI Act.

7.
On 25 June 2025, the period for dealing with the internal review request was extended
from 10 June 2025 until 8 July 2025 in accordance with section 54D [Internal review –
deemed affirmation of original decision] of the FOI Act.
8.
The purpose of this statement of reasons is to provide the applicant with a fresh
decision relating to their request.
Reviewing officer
9.
I am authorised to make this internal review decision under arrangements approved by
the Secretary of Defence under section 23 of the FOI Act.
Internal review decision
10.
After careful consideration, I have decided to uphold the original decision and refuse
the request under section 24 [Power to refuse request-diversion of resources etc.] of the FOI
Act.
Material taken into account
11.
In arriving at my decision, I had regard to:
a.  the scope of the applicant’s request as revised and subsequent internal review
application;
b.  the original decision;
c.  relevant provisions in the FOI Act;
d.  the Guidelines published by the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act (the Guidelines);
e.  the outcome of searches by the business line area; and
f.  the review of a sample of documents by the line area.
Findings and reasons
12.
Section 24 of the FOI Act provides that:
(1) If an agency or Minister is satisfied, when dealing with a request for a document
that a practical refusal reason exists in relation to the request (see section 24AA), the
agency or Minister:

(a) must undertake a request consultation process (see section 24AB); and
(b) if, after the request consultation process, the agency or Minister is satisfied
that the practical refusal reason still exists—the agency or Minister may
refuse to give access to the document in accordance with the request.
13.
Section 24AA of the FOI Act provides that:
(1) For the purposes of section 24, a practical refusal reason exists in relation to a
request for a document if either (or both) of the following applies:
(a) the work involved in processing the request:
(i) in the case of an agency – would substantially and unreasonably
divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
(b) the request does not satisfy the requirement in paragraph 15(2)(b)
(identification of documents).
14.
Based upon advice from the line area, the scope of the FOI request captures over 1264
documents, consisting of approximately 2328 pages. The time it will take for a departmental
officer (and a decision maker) to process this sample alone would be approximately 202
hours. This includes:
a.  identifying, locating and collating the documents,
b.  examining and assessing the documents
c.  undertaking third party consultations
d.  preparing the documents for release, including applying exemptions, redacting and
copying the documents, and
e.  drafting a Statement of Reasons and schedule.
The time taken has been calculated conservatively in favour of the applicant. Consequently,
the time taken to process this request in its entirety would be significant.
15.
The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) line area undertook a sampling process of
the documents. They reviewed 137 documents, totalling 1135 pages, which consisted of an
average of 8 pages for each document. (Some of the documents had PDF attachments, taking
the number of documents assessed to over the 10% sample size). This means the total number
of pages captured by the 1264 documents would include approximately 10,112 pages.
16.
Further, it was noted that the third party consultations would need to be conducted as
the documents captured business information of third parties.
17.
If this request was to be processed in its current form in its entirety it would have a
substantial and adverse effect on the RAAF’s other operations. Moreover, if this request was
to be processed it would divert the FOI review team from processing other review requests.
Consequently, I am satisfied that if this internal review request was to be processed it would
cause an unreasonable diversion of the department’s resources.
Further information
18.
In the applicant’s request for internal review, the applicant wrote:

I am writing to request an internal review of Department of Defence's handling of my
FOI request 'Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult Learning
Continuum Review (ALCR)'.

In the interest of facilitating a more focused and manageable search, I am narrowing
the scope of my request while preserving its intent. My primary objective is to
understand the budget and expenditure relating to the Cadet Learning Continuum
Review (CLCR) and the Adult Learning Continuum Review (ALCR) — processes that
have important implications for transparency and public accountability.

I would also like to request all correspondence and internal documents related to the
refusal of my original FOI request, including any internal consultation or decision-
making about invoking a practical refusal reason under section 24AA of the FOI Act.

19. I note the applicant, in their request for internal review, seeks access to documents
related to the processing of the original decision. The scope of an internal review is limited to
the original decision and the applicant is unable to expand the scope of their request on
internal review. We encourage the applicant to submit a fresh FOI request if they seek access
to these documents.
Belinda Digitally signed by
Belinda HAYWARD

HAYWARD Date: 2025.07.08
12:48:04 +10'00'
Belinda Hayward
Special Advisor – FOI Review