If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
6 February 2017
Our reference: LEX 24877
Mr William Shakespeare
By email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx Dear Mr Shakespeare
Decision on your Freedom of Information request
I refer to your revised request, dated 13 January 2017 and received by the Department of
Human Services (the
department) on the same date, for access under the
Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the
FOI Act) to the following documents:
'Centrelink will be aware there has been significant media attention with respect to
notices sent to large numbers of Centrelink clients recently, who were asked to
confirm previous employment earnings. The letters to which I refer are detailed in
articles such as this:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service/centrelinks-debt-
230000-have-now-been-hit-20170110-gtp8zt.html
It has been reported that Centrelink has data matched annual-based ATO data to
fortnightly-based Centrelink data which I assume was previously provided to
Centrelink by individuals in receipt of some Centrelink payments such as Newstart.
In undertaking this exercise, I assume it was authorised by an appropriate
delegate(s), and following their decision(s), appropriate instruction must have been
given to the relevant officers in a team involved in data analysis.
I therefore request the following documents:
1. The request sent to the delegate for approval to undertake this exercise.
2. The approval given by the delegate
3. All documents which give instructions and any specifications given to the data
analysis officer(s) involved in the development of this data matching exercise.'
My decision
I have decided to refuse your request under section 24(1) of the FOI Act because a 'practical
refusal reason' still exists under section 24AA of the FOI Act. I am satisfied that the work
involved in processing your request would substantially and unreasonably divert the
resources of the department from its other operations as specified in section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of
the FOI Act.
PAGE 1 OF 8
The reasons for my decision, including the relevant sections of the FOI Act, are set out in
Attachment A.
You can ask for a review of our decision
If you disagree with the decision you can ask for a review. There are two ways you can do
this. You can ask for an internal review from within the department, or an external review by
the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. You do not have to pay for reviews of
decisions. See
Attachment B for more information about how arrange a review.
Further assistance
If you have any questions please email
xxx.xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Authorised FOI Decision Maker
Freedom of Information Team
FOI and Litigation Branch | Legal Services Division
Department of Human Services
xxx.xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
PAGE 2 OF 8
Department of Human Services
If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
REASONS FOR DECISION
What you requested
'I assume A DHS employee, or group employees, would have been responsible for
creating the 'model' which data matched ATO data to DHS data, which produced a
target population to be sent letters, many of whom are clearly not in any debt to the
Commonwealth.
With respect to the particular 'model' that is relevant here, I request the following
documents:
1. All documents which describe, or otherwise concern decision making and approval
processes.
2. Any document which details why a more 'sophisticated' model was not considered,
for example, one that considered data at the Centrelink reporting period level, rather
than an aggregate annual earnings figure.'
Request consultation process
On 12 January 2017, I wrote to you providing a notice of intention to refuse your request
under section 24AB(2) of the FOI Act as your request was too big to process. I gave you an
opportunity to consult with the department to revise your request so as to remove the
practical refusal reason. Because your original request covered a very wide range of
documents, the department suggested that you be more specific about the type of
documents you were seeking.
On 13 January 2017, you revised your request to be:
'Centrelink will be aware there has been significant media attention with respect to
notices sent to large numbers of Centrelink clients recently, who were asked to confirm
previous employment earnings. The letters to which I refer are detailed in articles such
as this:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service/centrelinks-debt-230000-have-
now-been-hit-20170110-gtp8zt.html
It has been reported that Centrelink has data matched annual-based ATO data to
fortnightly-based Centrelink data which I assume was previously provided to Centrelink
by individuals in receipt of some Centrelink payments such as Newstart.
In undertaking this exercise, I assume it was authorised by an appropriate delegate(s),
and following their decision(s), appropriate instruction must have been given to the
relevant officers in a team involved in data analysis.
I therefore request the following documents:
1. The request sent to the delegate for approval to undertake this exercise.
2. The approval given by the delegate
PAGE 3 OF 8
3. All documents which give instructions and any specifications given to the data
analysis officer(s) involved in the development of this data matching exercise.'
What I took into account
In reaching my decision I took into account:
your original request dated 3 January 2017 and your revised request of
13 January 2017;
the documents that fall within the scope of your request;
consultations with departmental officers about:
o the nature of the documents; and
o the department's operating environment and functions;
guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of
the FOI Act (the
Guidelines);
the FOI Act.
Reasons for my decisions
I am authorised to make decisions under section 23(1) of the FOI Act.
Following the request consultation process outlined above, in accordance with section 24AB
of the FOI Act, I am satisfied that a practical refusal reason still exists in that the work
involved in processing your request would substantially and unreasonably divert the
resources of the department from its other operations. The reasons for my decision, including
consideration of the factors I am required to take into account in section 24AA(2), are
outlined below.
Practical refusal reason
Section 24AA of the FOI Act provides that a practical refusal reason exists in relation to a
request for a document if the work involved in processing the request would:
'substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other
operations'.
The word 'substantial' has previously been interpreted to mean severe, of some gravity, large
or weighty or of considerable amount, real or of substance and not insubstantial or of
nominal consequence. The use of the word 'unreasonable' has been interpreted to mean
that a weighing of all relevant considerations is needed, including the extent of the resources
needed to meet the request.
In determining whether processing the request would substantially and unreasonably divert
the department's resources, section 24AA(2) requires me to have regard to the resources
that would have to be used for the following:
identifying, locating or collating the documents within the filing system of the
department;
PAGE 4 OF 8
Department of Human Services
deciding whether to grant, refuse or defer access to a document including resources
used for examining the document and consulting with any person or body in relation
to the request;
making a copy or an edited copy of the document; and
notifying of any decision on the request.
In accordance with section 24AA(3), I did not consider your reasons for requesting access to
the documents.
Why your request is substantial
The department's searches and enquiries identified approximately 349 documents relevant to
your revised request. These documents contain approximately 12942 pages in total.
I have calculated that it would take over 760 hours to process your request.
I have estimated the time to process your request as follows:
Search and retrieval time
19 hours
Examine pages for decision making at an
431 hours
average of 2 minutes per page
Redaction time at 2 minutes per page for
266 hours
8000 pages (noting that approximately 5000
pages will not require redaction)
Draft statement of reasons
50 hours
Total
766 hours
Sampling of documents for the purposes of the estimate
The scope of your request captures a range of sensitive documents used in the development
of the department’s Online Compliance Intervention. The complex nature of the documents
within scope would require lengthy examination and extensive redaction. This is a time-
intensive process.
I determined it was appropriate to sample the pages of the documents within the scope of
your request. The sampled documents revealed a range specifications used to develop the
department’s Online Compliance Intervention.
After reviewing a sample of the identified documents, I found that the files contain a
substantial amount of sensitive information. A number of redactions will be required on many
pages to remove sensitive information.
I am satisfied on the basis of that sample that I would have needed to consider applying the
following redactions under FOI Act:
a. section 47C to deliberative material; and
b. section 47E(d) to documents where release could interfere with the operations
of the department.
PAGE 5 OF 8
Department of Human Services
In my calculation I have allowed 2 minutes per page for both considering the page and
making a decision on the page, and an additional 2 minutes per page to apply any necessary
redactions. I am satisfied that this is the average amount of time that would be required to
process your request as some pages of your request which detail investigation material
would require more than 2 minutes per page and some pages, where no sensitivities are
present, would only take 1 minute per page.
Based on the sample of documents assessed, I estimate that to properly consider each
document, redact exempt material and prepare a statement of reasons, it would take a
decision maker approximately 747 hours. This calculation does not include the amount of
time that would be spent consulting other Commonwealth agencies on material in the
documents relevant to their portfolios, or the time spent by the decision-maker consulting on
sensitivities with business areas within the department.
Why your request is unreasonable
For the purposes of deciding whether your request would unreasonably divert the resources
of the department from its other operations, I considered whether the substantial resource
burden would be unreasonable having regard to the fact that one individual processing your
request would be required to spend over 20 weeks processing your request.
As discussed above, I have estimated that your request would take approximately 766 hours
to process. The department receives approximately 300 - 400 FOI requests per month, the
majority of which are requests from people seeking their own information. I am satisfied that
the processing of your request would divert department resources from the processing of
these other requests.
Conclusion
In summary I am satisfied that the work involved in processing your request would
substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the department from its other
operations, namely the processing of other FOI requests and the delivery of social services
to all Australians more broadly.
I have found that a practical refusal reason exists in relation to your request for access to the
documents. Accordingly I have decided to refuse your request under section 24(1) of the
FOI Act.
PAGE 6 OF 8
Department of Human Services
If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
Attachment B
INFORMATION ON RIGHTS OF REVIEW
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
Asking for a full explanation of a Freedom of Information decision
Before you ask for a formal review of an FOI decision, you can contact us to discuss your
request. We will explain the decision to you. This gives you a chance to correct
misunderstandings.
Asking for a formal review of a Freedom of Information decision
If you still believe a decision is incorrect, the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act)
gives 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:
1. an Internal Review Officer in the Department of Human Services (the department);
and/or
2. the Australian Information Commissioner.
Note 1: There are no fees for these reviews.
Applying for an internal 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
made within 30 days of receiving this letter
sent to the address at the top of the first page of this letter.
Note 2: 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 decision or the internal review decision, you can ask the
Australian Information Commissioner to review the decision.
If you do not receive a decision from an Internal Review Officer in the department within 30
days of applying, you can ask the Australian Information Commissioner for a review of the
original FOI decision.
You will have 60 days to apply in writing for a review by the Australian Information
Commissioner.
You can
lodge your application:
PAGE 7 OF 8
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Note 3: The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner generally prefers FOI
applicants to seek internal review before applying for external review by the Australian
Information Commissioner.
Important:
If you are applying online, the application form the 'Merits Review Form' is available at
www.oaic.gov.au.
If you have one, you should include with your application a copy of the Department of
Human Services' decision on your FOI request
Include your contact details
Set out your reasons for objecting to the department's 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 also 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
The Commonwealth Ombudsman generally prefers applicants to seek review before
complaining about a decision.
PAGE 8 OF 8
Department of Human Services
