If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
16 March 2017
Our reference: LEX 25125
Mr Derek Adams
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Adams
Freedom of Information Request – Charges - Reconsideration
I refer to your request received by the Department of Human Services (the
department) on 9
January 2017, for access under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the
FOI Act) to the following:
'All documents contained within the file "Perpetual Centrelink Calendar 107-03040000" as
listed on this page:
http://operational.humanservices.gov.au/public/Pages/debts/107-03040000-01.html'
Preliminary Assessment of the Charge
On 31 January 2017 the department notified you that you are liable to pay a charge for the
processing of your request and advised that the preliminary assessment of that charge was $15.00.
This charge was calculated as follows:
Search and retrieval time: 1 hour, at $15.00 per hour:
$15.00
Decision-making time (*after deduction of 5 hours): 0 hours, at
$20.00 per hour
$0.00
TOTAL
$15.00
*The FOI Act provides that the first five hours of decision-making time are free of charge and this is reflected in the
calculation.
On 10 February 2017 you wrote to the department contending the charge should not be imposed, in
particular, you submitted that:
the department is acting in bad faith and in breach of guidelines issued by the Australian
Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act (the
Guidelines), and
the release of the documents is in the public interest.
In my preliminary assessment of charges, I advised you there was one document of three pages
that fell within the scope of your request. The charge has been calculated on the processing of
those three pages. However, upon further inspection for the purposes of assessing the charge it has
become clear that the document is actually 108 pages long.
PAGE 1 OF 6
Under section 29(6) of the FOI Act, a decision regarding contention of charges was due to be
notified to you on 13 March 2017. Under section 29(7) of the FOI Act, because notification did not
occur, the decision is taken to be a deemed affirmation of the preliminary assessment of charges.
Despite this, I have continued to review your contention and my decision is below.
Reconsideration of the Charge
Section 29(4) of the FOI Act provides a discretion to reduce or not impose a charge. In making a
decision in relation to this discretion, section 29(5) requires me to consider:
whether payment of the charge would cause financial hardship to the applicant, and
whether giving access to the document is in the general public interest or in the interest of a
substantial section of the public.
The guidelines state, at paragraph 4.71:
‘In addition to considering those two matters, an agency or minister may consider any other
relevant matter, and in particular should give genuine consideration to any contention or
submission made by an applicant as to why a charge should be reduced or waived’.
Bad Faith
You submit that the department is acting in bad faith in choosing to impose a charge for this
request. I do not accept your submission. The charge has been calculated with reference to a true
estimation of the work it would take for the department to respond to your request. It was made in
line with the procedure outlined in section 29 of the FOI Act. Accordingly, I am not satisfied the
charge should be reduced or waived on this ground.
Financial Hardship
You did not request reconsideration on the basis that the charge would cause you financial
hardship. I have no evidence available to me to indicate the charge would cause you financial
hardship. Accordingly, I am not satisfied the charge should be reduced or waived on this ground.
Public Interest
You submit that the release of documents in the scope of your request is in the public interest.
In considering whether something is of the public interest for the consideration of charges, the
Guidelines relevantly provide, at paragraph 4.83:
‘The ‘public interest’ is a concept of wide import that cannot be exhaustively defined… The
following examples nevertheless illustrate circumstances in which the giving of access may
be in the general public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public:
The document relates to a matter of public debate, or a policy issue under discussion
within an agency, and disclosure of the document would assist public comment on or
participation in the debate or discussion’.
You submit that the documents in the scope of your request are listed in the department’s
Operational Blueprint under the ‘Debts section’. As such, you submit that they are of interest to the
public as they are related to the department’s Online Compliance intervention activities, about which
there has been recent media attention.
PAGE 2 OF 6
Department of Human Services
The department has a broad range of practises in relation to the collection of money where
required. The majority of these practices are not related to Online Compliance Intervention, and are
not related to the current matter of public debate to which you refer. Having reviewed the document
in the scope of your request, I am satisfied that it is not related to the subject matter of recent public
debate. I am satisfied that its release would not assist public comment or participation in that
debate. I am not satisfied there is any general or specific section of the public that would have an
interest in the material being released. Accordingly, I am not satisfied the charge should be reduced
or waived on this ground.
In weighing up these matters, I am satisfied it is not in the public interest for the information to be
released, and accordingly I am not satisfied the charge should be waived or reduced on this ground.
With this in mind, I am satisfied the department has calculated the charge correctly.
Options
If you would like the department to continue processing your request, you must:
a) pay the charge;
b) seek external review of the reconsideration of the decision to impose a charge; or
c) withdraw the request for access.
Further information on options A, B and C is set out below.
Option A - pay the charge
As the charge is less than $25, you are required to pay the full amount of $15 within 30 days of
receiving this notice.
The amount due should be paid by cheque or money order made out to the Collector of Public
Monies. Please quote the reference number FOI LEX 25125 with your payment.
Should you elect to pay the charge please email xxx.xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx once you
have posted your cheque or money order to advise us of your payment.
Option B - seek external review
If you still believe a decision is incorrect, section 54L of the FOI Act allows you to apply for a review
of an FOI decision by the Australian Information Commissioner. Further information regarding this
option can be found at
Attachment B.
Option C - withdraw your request
If you wish to withdraw your request you may do so in writing.
PAGE 3 OF 6
Department of Human Services
Address for correspondence
Please send all correspondence regarding your FOI request to me at the following address:
Freedom of Information team
Department of Human Services
PO Box 7820
CANBERRA ACT 2610
Or by email to xxx.xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
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
PAGE 4 OF 6
Department of Human Services
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 section 54L of the FOI Act, you can apply for a
review of an FOI decision by the Australian Information Commissioner.
Note: There are no fees for these reviews.
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.
You will have 60 days to apply in writing for a review by the Australian Information Commissioner.
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
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
PAGE 5 OF 6
Department of Human Services
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 6 OF 6
Department of Human Services
