Decision Notice LEX 1531.pdf

Capt. HighFlyer
By email only: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Our reference: LEX 1531
Dear Capt. HighFlyer
Decision regarding your Freedom of Information request
1. I am writing about your Freedom of Information (FOI) request under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) made on 5 July 2025 for access to documents held by the
Australian Public Service Commission (the Commission).
2. The FOI Act is publicly available from www.legislation.gov.au.
Documents relevant to your request
3. You requested access to documents on the following terms:
The scope of this request is all executive employees who held a membership to the Qantas Chairmans
Lounge or the Virgins Beyond Lounge, at any time during the period 1 July 2024 - 30 June 2025.
Please provide, for this same period:
1. Any documents that detail official work completed during any attendance at one of the above-
mentioned airline lounges. This could include for example meeting invites, meeting notes, agenda
items, etc
2. All documents showing flight details where the departure or arrival airport has either of the above-
mentioned lounges.
3. All documents detailing any meal allowances paid to the executive employee in respect of travel
undertaken on the above flights.
For privacy reasons I am happy for the dates and locations (ie. airports) be redacted, providing the
documents are labelled or ordered in such a way that the flights can be connected with any related
meal allowance (if applicable).
(Request)
4. On 12 July 2025, you agreed with the Commission’s request to:
a. the names of staff (below EL 2) being redacted; and
b. being given final email chains (excluding any duplicates);
1

c.  reduced the scope of the request to cover the period from 1 April 2025 to 30 June 2025.
5.  A decision on your Request is due to you by 4 August 2025.
  Decision on your FOI request
  6.  I am authorised under subsection 23(1) of the FOI Act to make FOI decisions.

7.  I am satisfied that all reasonable steps have been taken to locate documents relevant to your
request.

8.  I have identified (30) documents in scope of your Request, being:
a.  Document 1: CTM Booking for APS Commissioner (Qantas Airways, trip 117179)
b.  Document 2: CTM Booking for APS Commissioner (Trip 114107)
c.  Document 3: CTM Booking for APS Commissioner (Trip 116117)
d.  Document 4: CTM Booking for APS Commissioner (Trip 120057)
e.  Document 5: CTM Booking for Deputy Commissioner Bacon (Trip 115233)
f.  Document 6: CTM Booking for Deputy Commissioner Bacon (Trip 114113)
g.  Document 7: CTM Booking for Deputy Commissioner Banerjee (Trip 115116)
h.  Document 8: Meal receipt from Four Points by Sheraton Perth
i.  Document 9: Meal receipt from Ministra Pty Ltd
j.  Document 10: Meal receipt for onboard flight meal from Virgin Australia
k.  Document 11: Meal receipt from Mr Collins Melbourne
l.  Document 12: Meal receipt from Sushi and Nori Melbourne
m.  Document 13: Meeting invite for NIAA and APSC Workshop
n.  Document 14: Call – Commissioner de Brouwer
o.  Document 15: Email from Commissioner de Bouwer dated 22 May 2025
p.  Document 16: Email from Commissioner sent around 1407 dated 6/06/2025
q.  Documents 17 to 19: Email from Commissioner sent around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
r.  Documents 20 to 21: Email from Commissioner sent around 1414 dated 6/06/2025
s.  Document 22: Email from Commissioner sent around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
t.  Document 23: Email from Commissioner sent around 1415 dated 6/06/2025
u.  Document 24: Email from Commissioner sent around 1414 dated 6/06/2025
v.  Document 25: Email from Commissioner sent around 1411 dated 6/06/2025
w.  Document 26: Email from Commissioner sent around 1416 dated 6/06/2025
x.  Document 27: Email from Commissioner sent around 1416 dated 6/06/2025
y.  Document 28: Email from Commissioner sent around 1415 dated 6/06/2025
z.  Document 29: Email from Commissioner sent around 1416 dated 6/06/2025
aa. Document 30: Email from Commissioner sent around 1508 dated 6/06/2025

9.  I have decided to grant you partial access to Documents 8, and 13 to 30 with irrelevant
and personal information deleted under sections 22 and 47F respectively of the FOI Act.
10.  Attachment A sets out the document to be released and reasons for it are in Attachment
B.

Deletion of exempt or irrelevant matter
  11.  Section 22 of the FOI Act requires an agency to provide access to an edited version of a
document where it is reasonably practicable to edit the document to remove exempt
material or material that is irrelevant to the scope of the request.
2

12.  Accordingly, to the extent that the content of, or information contained in, the documents
listed above is considered exempt or otherwise out of scope of the request, it has been
deleted.

Review rights

13.  You  are  entitled  to  seek  review  of  this  decision.    Your  review  rights  are  set  out  at
Attachment C.

Contacts
14.  If you require clarification on matters in this letter please contact the Commission’s FOI
Officer by email at xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx.

Yours sincerely

Meeghan Webster

Authorised FOI decision maker
Australian Public Service Commission
4 August 2025

3

ATTACHMENT A

SCHEDULE OF DOCUMENTS

Document Description
Exemption grounds
1
Document 1: CTM Booking for APS
Commissioner (Qantas Airways, trip 117179)
---

2
Document 2: CTM Booking for APS
---
Commissioner (Trip 114107)
3
Document 3: CTM Booking confirmation for ---
APS Commissioner (Trip 116117)
4
Document 4: CTM Booking for APS
---
Commissioner (Trip 120057)
5
Document 5: CTM Booking for Deputy
---
Commissioner Bacon (Trip 115233)
4

6
Document 6: CTM Booking for Deputy
---
Commissioner Bacon (Trip 114113)
7
Document 7: CTM Booking for Deputy
---
Commissioner Banerjee (Trip 115116)
8
Document 8: Meal receipt from Four Points by Section 47F (Personal privacy)
Sheraton Perth

9
Document 9: Meal receipt from Ministra Pty
---
Ltd
10
Document 10: Meal receipt for onboard flight ---
meal from Virgin Australia
11
Document 11: Meal receipt from Mr Collins
---
Melbourne
12
Document 12: Meal receipt from Sushi and
---
Nori Melbourne
5

13
Document 13: Meeting invite for NIAA and
Section 22 (irrelevant information)
APSC Workshop
14
Document 14: Call –  Commissioner de
Brouwer
Section 22 (irrelevant information)

15
Document 15: Email from Commissioner de
Section 22 (irrelevant information)
Bouwer dated 22 May 2025
16
Document 16: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1407 dated 6/06/2025
17
Documents 17: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
18
Documents 18: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
19
Documents 19: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
6

20
Document 20: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1414 dated 6/06/2025
21
Document 21: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1414 dated 6/06/2025
22
Document 22: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1413 dated 6/06/2025
23
Document 23: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1415 dated 6/06/2025
24
Document 24: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1414 dated 6/06/2025
25
Document 25: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1411 dated 6/06/2025
26
Document 26: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1416 dated 6/06/2025

7

27
Document 27: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1416 dated 6/06/2025
28
Document 28: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1415 dated 6/06/2025
29
Document 29: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1416 dated 6/06/2025
30
Document 30: Email from Commissioner sent  Section 22 (irrelevant information)
around 1508 dated 6/06/2025
8

ATTACHMENT B

Reasons for decision
1.  In making my decision I have had regard to:
•  the terms of your request;
•  the content of the documents;
•  the FOI Act; and
•  the FOI Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner (FOI
Guidelines).
Exemptions
Section 47F – Personal privacy
2.  Section 47F of the FOI Act provides that a document is conditionally exempt if it would
involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person.

3.  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
•  the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.

4.  I consider that Document 8 contains parts that are conditionally exempt. Specifically,
the residential address of Deputy Commissioner Rachel Bacon.

5.  I have had regard to the matters I must consider under subsection 47F(2) of the FOI Act
in determining whether the disclosure of the personal information would involve the
unreasonable disclosure of personal information.

6.  In considering what is unreasonable, the  Administrative  Appeals  Tribunal  in  Re
Chandra and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs [1984] AATA 437 at [51]
stated:.
…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… and to weigh that
interest in the balance against the public interest in protecting the personal privacy of  a
third party…

7.  Other factors  to be  considered  include  the  nature,  age and  current  relevance  of  the
information,  any  opposition to disclosure held  by  the  person  that  the  personal
information relates to, and the circumstances of an agency’s collection and use of the
information (‘FG’ and National Archives of Australia [2015] AICmr 26 at [47]).

8.  I note  that in  Warren; Chief  Executive Officer,  Services  Australia  and (Freedom of
information) [2020] AATA 4557 (9 November 2020), Deputy President S  A Forgie
9

found (at [130]):

An individual may include his or her direct telephone number in correspondence
directed to other persons. Unless published on an agency’s website or made public
in  some other way, such as on a pamphlet or report available to the public, I
consider  that disclosure of an individual’s telephone number in his or her place of
employment  is unreasonable. Its disclosure will provide an avenue by which others
may choose to  express their displeasure with the individual or with that for which
he or she is  responsible but its disclosure does not make any positive contribution to
increasing  public participation in Government processes or in increasing scrutiny,
discussion,  comment and review of the Government’s activities.

9.  In relation to the question of whether disclosure would be unreasonable, the FOI
Guidelines provide, at paragraph [6.144]:

For example, in Colakovski v Australian Telecommunications Corp, Heerey J  considered that
‘...  if the  information  disclosure were of no demonstrable  relevance  to  the  affairs of
government and was likely to do no more than excite or satisfy the  curiosity of people about
the person whose personal affairs were disclosed ...  disclosure would be unreasonable’. This
illustrates how the object of the FOI Act of  promoting transparency in government processes
and activities needs to be balanced  with the purpose of s 47F to protect personal privacy,
although care is needed to ensure that an FOI applicant is not expected to explain their reason
for access to  contrary to s 11(2).

10.  Relevant to personal information of certain public servants, under the FOI Act there is
no  presumption  that  agencies  and  ministers  should  start  from  the  position  that  the
inclusion of the full names of staff in documents increases transparency and the  objects
of the FOI Act: Warren; Chief Executive Officer, Services Australia and  (Freedom of
information) [2020] AATA 4557 at [83].

11.  I have identified the following factors that, in my view, do not support the release of
this personal information under section 47F of the FOI Act:

•  the individuals’ personal information, in particular their name and residential
address, will identify them;
•  the  personal  information  is  unique  and  relates  specifically to  the  individual,  and
is  not likely known or publicly available; the FOI Act does not control or restrict  the
subsequent use or dissemination of information released under the FOI Act;
•  the disclosure of this information will not advance scrutiny of any decisions
falling  within scope of your FOI request;
•  the disclosure of this information could expose the Deputy Commissioner to
unsolicited and inappropriate approaches by external parties;
•  release of the individuals’ personal  information may cause stress  for them  or
other  detriment; and
•  disclosure would prejudice the individuals’ right to privacy.

12.  I have therefore decided to the extent that Document 8 includes personal information
of Deputy Commissioner Bacon,  those parts are conditionally exempt from disclosure
under section 47F of the FOI Act because disclosure would involve the unreasonable
disclosure of their personal  information.
10

Section 11A – Public interest test

13.  Subsection  11A(5)  of  the  FOI  Act  provides  that  an  agency  must  give  access  to  a
document if it is conditionally exempt unless access to the document would, on balance,
be contrary to the public interest.

14.  I  have  considered  the  public  interest  exemption  factors  in  favour  of  disclosure  at
subsection 11B(3) of the FOI Act, including the extent to which access to the documents
would promote the objects of the FOI Act and inform debate on a matter of public
importance.

15.  I have identified the following factors as weighing against disclosure:
•  disclosure of individuals’ personal information will not advance any scrutiny of  any
decisions falling within the scope of your FOI request; and
•  disclosure would prejudice individuals’ right to privacy.

16.  Subsection 11B(4) of the FOI Act lists factors that are irrelevant to determining
whether access would be in the public interest. I have not considered these factors.

17. On balance, I find disclosure of some parts of the Document 8 referred to above would be
contrary to the public interest. To the extent that the material contained in 8 is
conditionally exempt under sections 47F of the FOI Act.

11

ATTACHMENT C

Rights of Review
  Asking for a full explanation of a Freedom of Information decision
If you are dissatisfied with this decision, you may seek review. Before you seek review of
a  Freedom of Information (FOI) decision, you may contact us to discuss your request and
we  will explain the decision to you.
Seeking review of a Freedom of Information decision
If you still believe a decision is incorrect, the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act)
may give you the right to apply for a review of the decision. Under sections 54 and 54L of
the  FOI Act, you can apply for a review of an FOI decision by seeking:
a.  an internal review by an different officer of the Australian Public
Service  Commission; and/or
b.  external review by the Australian Information Commissioner.
There are no fees applied to either review option.
Applying for a review by an Internal Review Officer
If you apply for internal review, a different decision maker to the departmental delegate
who  made the original decision will carry out the review. The Internal Review Officer will
consider all aspects of the original decision and decide whether it should change. An
application for internal review must be made in writing within 30 days of receiving this
letter  to:
Email:
xxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Post:
The FOI Officer
Australian Public Service
Commission B Block, Treasury
Building
GPO Box 3176
Parkes Place West
PARKES ACT 2600
You do not need to fill in a form. However, it is a good idea to set out any relevant
submissions you would like the Internal Review Officer to further consider, and your
reasons  for disagreeing with the decision.
Applying for external review by the Australian Information Commissioner
If you do not agree with the original FOI decision or the internal review decision, you can
12

ask  the Australian Information Commissioner to review the decision. You have 60 days to
apply  in writing for a review by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
(the OAIC)  from the date you received this letter or any subsequent internal review
decision.
  You can lodge your application:
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
Australian Information
Commissioner  GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
The OAIC encourage applicants to apply online. Where possible, to assist the OAIC you
should include your contact information, a copy of the related FOI decision and provide
details of your reasons for objecting to the decision.
Complaints to the Information Commissioner and Commonwealth Ombudsman
Information Commissioner
You may complain to the Information Commissioner concerning action taken by an agency
in the exercise of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act. There is no fee
for making a complaint. A complaint to the Information Commissioner must be made in
writing. The Information Commissioner's contact details are:
Telephone:  1300 363 992
Website:
www.oaic.gov.au
Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may complain to the Ombudsman concerning action taken by an agency in the exercise
of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act. There is no fee for making a
complaint. A complaint to the Ombudsman may be made in person, by telephone or in
writing. The Ombudsman's contact details are:
Phone:
1300 362 072
Website:
www.ombudsman.gov.au
13