
Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
Peter Christensen Senior Information Governance
and Access Officer
University Governance Office
xxx@xxx.xxx.xx
11 November 2025
Jessie Brown
Via Email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
SUBJECT FOI 202500173– Decision Notice
Dear Jessie Brown,
On 31 July 2025, the Australian National University received your request seeking access to
documents under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the Act)
.
1. Scope of Request
I have taken your request to be as follows:
I wish to request the ANU Council Minutes for 30 May 2025 and 3 July 2025, including all drafts,
and notes and comments taken by the secretariat staff, and all correspondence between Council
members and their staff and secretariat staff relating to the minutes.
I also wish to request all minutes for the Council Standing Committee in 2025 including all drafts,
and notes and comments taken by the secretariat staff relating to the production of the minutes,
and all correspondence between Council members and their staff and secretariat staff relating to
the minutes.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request for access under the
Act.
The Australian National University
Canberra 2600, ACT Australia
TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12002 (Australian University)
CRICOS Provider Code: 00120C

Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
2.
Authority to Make Decision
I am an officer authorised under section 23 of the Act to make decisions in respect of requests to
access documents or to amend or annotate records.
3. Relevant Material
In reaching my decision I referred to the following:
• The terms of your request
• Documents relevant to the request
• Advice from University staff with responsibility for matters relating to the documents
to which you sought access
• The Act
• Guidelines published by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)
under section 93A of the Act (the FOI Guidelines)
4. Decision
ANU has located one (1) document relevant to your request.
In addition, to the above document, the Council Minutes referred to in your request have now
been published and are publicly available documents, and accessible at the following links
:
30 May 2025: Council Minutes - 30 May 2025 - Approved WEB.pdf
3 July 2025: Council Minutes - 3 July 2025 - Approved WEB.pdf
I have decided that document (1) is a fully exempt document in accordance with section 47C of the
Act, and will not be supplied to you, for the reasons discussed below.
4.1 Section 47C of the Act- Deliberative process
Section 47C conditionally exempts documents containing deliberative matter. Deliberative matter
is described in the FOI Guidelines as ‘content that is in the nature of, or relating to either:
• an opinion, advice or recommendation that has been obtained, prepared or recorded,
or
• a consultation or deliberation that has taken place, in the course of, or for the purposes
of, a deliberative process of the government, an agency or minister.
The Australian National University
2
CRICOS Provider #00120C

Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
‘Deliberative processes’ have previously been described as ‘the process of reflection, for
example, upon the wisdom and expediency of a proposal, a particular decision or a course
of action’.
Document 1 contains deliberative material in the form of opinions, advice and recommendations,
that was created for the purpose of a deliberative process by the University and are preliminary in
nature. The material contained in the document are handwritten notes taken throughout the
course of the Council Standing Committee and do not contain any final decision, judgements or
outcomes. I am satisfied that the information in the documents is not scientific, technical or
operational information, or purely factual material, and is
On this basis I consider that, subject to consideration of the public interest factors below, the
document in question is conditionally exempt under section 47C(1) as deliberative matter.
Conditional exemption under section 47C does not require me to consider whether any harm may
be caused if the documents were released, only to determine if the content of the document is
deliberative matter. However, I consider that harm would attend disclosure of the document as
discussed below in relation to the public interest factors.
The Public Interest
Section 31B of the Act provides that a document is conditionally exempt under Division 3, if access
to the document would also, on balance, be contrary to the public interest for the purposes of
section 11A(5) of the Act.
In applying this test, I have weighed the factors in favour of disclosure versus those against it.
I have identified the following factor for disclosure:
• it would promote the objects of the Act, as described in section 3.
I have identified the following factors against disclosure:
Disclosure of the deliberative matter:
• could reasonably be expected to prejudice the effectiveness of responsibilities of the
Committee to monitor, review, and, where appropriate, make recommendations and
endorse actions to Council.
• Would have a negative effect on officers recording potential amendments to the minutes
in writing, potentially reducing the accuracy of minutes
The Australian National University
3
CRICOS Provider #00120C

Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
• Potentially provide an incorrect view of the meeting, as the various potential amendments
arise from only one member/officer.
• have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the Council
Standing Committee and its responsibilities and as a consequence, the proper operations
of the University.
I have further identified that disclosure of the documents:
• would not inform debate on a matter of public importance; and
• would not provide an oversight of public expenditure; and
• would not allow a person to access their own personal information.
On balance, I consider that the public interest favours the exemption of the deliberative matter
contained in the documents and consequently I have decided that access to the documents would
be contrary to the public interest.
I have also had regard to section 11B(4) of the Act which sets out the factors which are irrelevant
to my decision:
• Access to the documents could result in embarrassment to the Commonwealth
Government, or cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government;
• Access to the documents could result in any person misinterpreting or misunderstanding
the documents;
• The authors of the documents were (or are) of high seniority in the agency to which the
request for access to the documents was made;
• Access to the documents could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
I have not taken into account any of these factors in this decision.
After balancing all the above relevant public interest considerations, I have concluded that the
disclosure of the conditionally exempt information contained within the documents is not in the
public interest and therefore is exempt from disclosure under the Act.
A copy of the document schedule is enclosed with this letter.
The Australian National University
4
CRICOS Provider #00120C

Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
Your review rights are outlined on the following page.
Yours sincerely
Mr Peter Christensen
Senior Information Governance and Access Officer
University Governance Office
Australian National University
The Australian National University
5
CRICOS Provider #00120C

Docusign Envelope ID: D730006F-236A-4D80-8394-C864A16C3AD5
Your review rights
If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may apply for internal review or Information
Commissioner review of the decision. We encourage you to seek internal review as a first step as it
may provide a more rapid resolution of your concerns
Application for Internal Review of Decision
Section 54A of the Act, gives you the right to apply for an internal review of my decision.
It must be made in writing within 30 days of receipt of this letter, no particular form is required but
it is desirable to set out in the application the grounds on which you consider the decision should
be reviewed.
The application should be addressed to Freedom of Information at
xxx@xxx.xxx.xx.
Application for Information Commissioner Review of decision
Under section 54L of the FOI Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to
review my decision. An application must be made in writing within 60 days of the date of this
letter, and be lodged in one of the following ways:
Form: either online form or downloadable form available at
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/your-freedom-of-information-
rights/freedom-of-information-reviews/information-commissioner-review
email:
xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Post: Director of FOI Dispute Resolution, GPO Box 5288, Sydney NSW 2001
More information is available on the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner website.
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/your-freedom-of-information-rights/freedom-
of-information-reviews
The Australian National University
6
CRICOS Provider #00120C