Combined documents marked up for IR decision Redacted.pdf

Document 1
From:
Foreman, Lisa
To:
Cairns, Louise; Bayles, Neil
Cc:
Spiers, Carolyn
Subject:
RE: 2 page summary of DVA Digital Readiness Bill submission [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Tuesday, 7 February 2017 11:24:19 AM
Attachments:
Summary of DVA submission to Senate Inquiry(2).docx
Louise and Neil – some comments. Neil could you pl confirm/discuss with Louise.
Lisa
From: Cairns, Louise
Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2017 10:41 AM
To: Foreman, Lisa
Cc: Spiers, Carolyn
Subject: 2 page summary of DVA Digital Readiness Bill submission [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi Lisa,
At the ESORT working group meeting last week on the Digital Readiness Bill, members suggested
that a two page summary of the Department’s submission to the Senate inquiry would be useful.
I’ve drafted the summary (attached), which Carolyn has cleared. Could you please review and let
me know if you’d like any changes made? Once you have cleared, I will provide to Craig Orme for
his clearance.
Thanks very much,
Louise.

Document 1
Summary of DVA’s submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Digital Readiness Bil
(s 22)
Public Interest Disclosures
DVA has a duty of care in providing its services to veterans and clients. However, often there are
privacy and legislative restraints on providing information that might be necessary in fulfilling that
duty of care. In instances of preventing harm to others or self-harm, addressing concerns for health
provision, maintaining the integrity of programmes, and preventing abuse of programmes by
providers, the Department is not able in some instances to provide timely information to prevent
detrimental outcomes to veterans.
Public Interest Disclosures are currently used in other areas of government in a careful and judicious
manner that al ows these issues to be addressed. It is important that measures that are in place and
working in other areas of government are afforded to DVA in order to fulfil its duty of care to
veterans and clients and provide the best outcome for them.

Document 1
In recognition that DVA has not previously had this public interest disclosure power, and that
disclosure of a person’s information is not to be undertaken lightly, five specific safeguards are built
into the proposed provisions, in addition to general safeguards already available.
The specific safeguards include:
•  the Secretary of DVA must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about
how the power is to be exercised and the rules will be a disallowable instrument
•  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the power is to
be exercised by the Secretary of DVA
•  the Secretary of DVA cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power
•  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary of DVA must notify
the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, give the
person a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed disclosure
of the information and consider any written comments made by the person (natural
justice requirements), and
•  unless the Secretary of DVA complies with the above natural justice requirements before
disclosing personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine
of 60 penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and the Repatriation
Commission) manages clients’ personal information in compliance with the Privacy Act 1988, and
the Department can be required to pay compensation for breaches of the Privacy Act 1988. In
addition, departmental staff may face sanctions under the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct
if they handle a client’s personal information in an unauthorised manner.  If a person is dissatisfied
with the Secretary’s decision to disclose information about them, they can apply for judicial review
under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977.
(s 22)

From:
Noel Mc Laughlin
To:
Bayles, Neil
Cc:
Cosson, Liz; Spiers, Carolyn; Cairns, Louise
Subject:
BRIEF ON EWG MEETING 24 NOV 16. [TO BE CLASSIFIED]
Date:
Wednesday, 30 November 2016 7:14:42 PM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image003.jpg
BRIFEING EWG MEETING 24NOV16.doc
Good evening Neil,
Pls find attached as a courtesy, a copy of my brief to the ADSO leadership.
I thank you for the opportunity to attend to attend and extend special thanks to Carolyn and
Louise for the comprehensive briefing which enabled me to put this report together.
Regards,
Noel
Noel Mc Laughlin
Chairman
RAAC Corporation

(s 22)

Information-sharing Power

The power vested in the Secretary will be for the disclosure of certain information e.g.
fraud, police investigations, misrepresentation in the community, and misuse in terms
of fact.

The information-sharing powers proposed in the Bill are vested in the Secretary DHS
and Secretary DSS who use this exercise of a power and function in fraud-related
matters.

Release of Information

Natural justice mandates that in the event the Secretary is intending to release
information, the Secretary owes a duty to contact the individual concerned and inform
them of that fact and give the respondent a reasonable opportunity to reply to the
notice.

The sharing of such information is subject to a very strict process to be followed.
This will be through the issue by the Minister of very strict guidelines, with which the
Secretary must comply. Failure to comply, will result in criminal action.

(s 22)

(s 22)
Restriction of Secretary’s Delegation

The powers granted to the Secretary under the proposed legislation, prevent the
Secretary from delegating the information-sharing powers. They are not delegable to
any other person. An amendment to s.214(1) VEA 1986, will be required to adjust
the section to reflect that fact.

Disclosure of Information

The EM states, “The right to privacy and reputation is contained in article 17 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR.)” (at p.3).

All three Acts will be amended to reflect certain disclosure provisions related to the
exchange of information between DVA and the ADF in respect of claims lodged by
members. These disclosures are also authorised and protected by the provisions of the
Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), in particular the Australian Privacy Principles (formerly the
IPPs) at s.14 of the Act.

Unauthorised disclosure of Information

The Secretary may, where an unauthorised disclosure takes place, be held criminally
liable for such unauthorised disclosures. An offence of this nature carries a pecuniary
penalty of 160 penalty points ($10,800).

The inclusion of this provision in all three Acts (s.409(A)(6) MRCA, s.151B(6)
DRCA and s.131A(6) VEA) act as a fetter to the abuse of a power a by the Secretary
and is considered to be a significant protective and beneficial application of a fetter to
guard against untrammelled power.

Safeguarding Measures

The EM sets out (at p.6) the safeguarding measures imposed on the Secretary in
relation to the exercise of a power and function under the proposed legislative
amendments. These safeguards which reinforce the duty of the Department to act as
an honest broker at all times, are:

•  the Secretary must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about
how the power is to be exercised
•  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the power
is to be exercised to anyone
•  the Secretary cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power to anyone
•  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary must notify
the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, give
the person a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed
disclosure of the information and consider any written comments made by the
person, and
•  unless the Secretary complies with the above requirements before disclosing
personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine of 60
penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

It is contended that the legislative amendments as proposed in the Bill are on any
reading, significant and combined with the beneficial DRCA (Henry VIII) provisions,
operate to ensure veterans and their families are protected and natural justice and
equitable decision-making is in fact, enhanced.
(s 22)

(s 22)
CONCLUSION

The briefings given by DVA over the past two EWG meetings and the issues
canvassed demonstrate a significant effort by DVA to remake itself to be able to
better manage its affairs in the digital age.
(s 22)
RECOMMENDATION

That you note the above and disseminate along with the attachments, prior to
ESORT’s next scheduled meeting.

Noel Mc Laughlin
Chairman
RAAC Corporation

(For and on behalf of ADSO)
30 November, 2016

Document 3
From:
Whyte, Angela
To:
Cairns, Louise
Subject:
FW: Consultation on Public Interest Disclosure Rule [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Thursday, 23 February 2017 2:52:49 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
As requested
Angela Whyte
Practice Coordinator
DALAS
Legal Services & Assurance Branch
Department of Veterans’ Affairs | www.dva.gov.au
Telephone: (s 22)
| Email: (s 22)
Gnabra Building, 21 Genge Street, Civic
GPO Box 9998, Canberra ACT 2601
email logo
From: Brenton Attard (s 22)

Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 3:14 PM
To: Spiers, Carolyn
Cc: Foreman, Lisa ; Whyte, Angela ; Angelene Falk ; Melanie Drayton ; Renee Alchin
Subject: RE: Consultation on Public Interest Disclosure Rule [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Hi Carolyn
Thanks for the update and for providing the draft PID ahead of the consultation.
We are happy for the consultation to be conducted via phone. If your Office could please call us
on (s 22)
.
The OAIC attendees at the teleconference will be:
· Angelene Falk, Deputy Commissioner
· Melanie Drayton, Assistant Commissioner – Regulation and Strategy
· Renee Alchin, Adviser.
I will send over the meeting invitation.
Regards,
Brenton
Brenton Attard | Executive Officer |
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner |
GPO Box 5218 SYDNEY NSW 2001 |www.oaic.gov.au|
Phone: (s 22)
| 1300 363 992
Email: (s 22)
From: Spiers, Carolyn(s 22)

Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 2:25 PM
To: Brenton Attard (s 22)
Cc: Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
; Whyte, Angela (s 22)
Subject: Consultation on Public Interest Disclosure Rule [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Hi Brenton
I understand you have been discussing with Kristy Egan from DVA the proposed meeting this
Thursday 23 February @ 12.00pm – 1.00pm for OAIC members to meet with Ms Lisa Foreman
(First Assistant Secretary Rehabilitation and Support Division) and myself to discuss the draft

Document 3
Public Interest Disclosure Rules that will be part of the Digital Readiness Bill. While Kristy
arranged for Lisa and I to meet with OIAC in Sydney, we will need to change plans now and
instead have the meeting via telephone. I understand that this arrangement is suitable for OAIC.
Can you confirm which telephone number will be the most appropriate for us to call.
Also to assist in the preparation of this meeting is a draft copy of the proposed rules. Please
understand this is a confidential draft prepared for the Minister and should be used for the
purpose of the consultation only.
If you have any questions, please call Angela Whyte on (s 22)
.
Regards
Carolyn Spiers
Principal Legal Advisor
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go to
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
***********************************************************************
WARNING: The information contained in this email may be confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, any use or copying of any part
of this information is unauthorised. If you have received this email in
error, we apologise for any inconvenience and request that you notify
the sender immediately and delete all copies of this email, together
with any attachments.
***********************************************************************

Document 4
From:
Cairns, Louise
To:
ESO.Round.Table
Cc:
DALAS
Subject:
RE: Digital Readiness at 3 March ESORT [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Attachments:
ESORT Agenda Item Coversheet Template.docx
Hi Grant,
We’ve confirmed that Carolyn is happy to lead this discussion and I’ve filled in the cover sheet.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Regards,
Louise.
(s 22)

Document 4
From: Wrigley, Luke On Behalf Of Rehab.and.Support.Coord
Sent: Wednesday, 18 January 2017 9:19 AM
To: DALAS (s 47E)
Cc: ESO.Round.Table (s 47E)
; Rehab.and.Support.Coord
(s 47E)
Subject: FW: ESORT coversheet - DRB [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Good morning DALAS,
RE my below request for a coversheet to be prepared for the March ESORT meeting, (s 47C)
Are you able to confirm this with the PLA, and if she agrees, prepare an ESORT cover sheet and
return it to the secretariat (Cc’d into this email).
Kind regards
Luke Wrigley
A/g Assistant Director
Rehabilitation and Support Division
Department of Veterans' Affairs
Gnabra Building
Canberra ACT 2606
Phone: (s 22)
Email: (s 22)
From: Wrigley, Luke
Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2017 12:06 PM
To: Case.Escalation.and.MRCA.Review.Coord
(s 47E)
Cc: Bayles, Neil (s 22)
Subject: ESORT coversheet - DRB [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Good afternoon Lynda
Neil and Lisa have an ESORT working group meeting RE the Digital Readiness Bill (DRB) on 1
February. Lisa would also like an item to be added to the March ESORT meeting to provide the
full ESORT with a 15 minute verbal update on the DRB. Can you please arrange for an ESORT
coversheet on this item to be prepared and provided to me by COB Wednesday 25 January.
Thanks! J
Luke Wrigley
A/g Assistant Director
Rehabilitation and Support Division
Department of Veterans' Affairs
Gnabra Building
Canberra ACT 2606
Phone: (s 22)
Email: (s 22)

Document 5
From:
Spiers, Carolyn
To:
Vittoria, Nadia; White, Frank
Cc:
Cairns, Louise
Subject:
Digital Readiness Bill Privacy Impact Assessment - consolidated DVA and ... cs comments [DLM=For-Official-
Use-Only]
Date:
Friday, 24 February 2017 1:49:58 PM
Attachments:
Digital Readiness Bill Privacy Impact Assessment - consolidated DVA and ... cs comments.docx

Document 5
123456
7

Privacy Impact Assessment Report

Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment

21193387

Document 5
(Digital Readiness and Other Measures)
Bil 2016

Public Interest Disclosure Provisions

21193387

Document 5

1) Executive Summary

•  The PID provisions relate only to the disclosure of information (including ‘personal
information’ and ‘sensitive information’ as defined in the Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy
Act)) in listed circumstances – in this way, they provide further bases for authorised
disclosure, which operate in addition to the current bases for authorised disclosure
set out in Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 6.
•  In all other respects, any personal information that may potentially be disclosed by
the Department through the operation of the PID provisions is required to be
handled by the Department in accordance with the current APPs relating to
collection, use, quality, security and access.
•  (s 47C)

•  The requirement that an individual be notified of a proposed disclosure of their
personal information prior to any disclosure being made is an important privacy
safeguard – it will operate to ensure that the power is exercised in appropriate and
necessary cases and will also provide individuals with the opportunity to inform the
Department if information is inaccurate, out of date or incomplete. (s 47C)
]
•  In some instances, the PID provisions could operate to permit public disclosure of
personal information, rather than disclosure to particular recipients subject to
specific privacy obligations in their own handling of this information(s 47C)

that this public disclosure power would be utilised only in
circumstances where a significant public benefit would be served by such action,
supplementary procedures should be developed to assist in assessing the potential
consequences, risks and benefits of any public disclosure.
•  It will be necessary for the Department’s current privacy materials and published
documents to be reviewed and updated to reflect the operation and effect of the
PID provisions. In addition, specific staff training materials and guidelines need to be
prepared to ensure that Departmental employees understand the meaning and
operation of key definitions and tests in the PID provisions and are able to explain
the effect of these changes to Departmental (s 47C)
and other
stakeholders.
•  The recommendations arising from this Assessment are set out at page 27 below.

1

21193387

(s 42) , (s 47C)

Document 6
From:
Bayles, Neil
To:
Cairns, Louise
Subject:
RE: Digital Readiness Bill Q&As [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Date:
Thursday, 1 December 2016 8:54:37 AM
(s 22)
From: Bayles, Neil
Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2016 7:47 AM
To: Roberts, David (s 22)
; Summers, Wendy
(s 22)
; Harris, John (s 22)
Cc: Spiers, Carolyn(s 22)
; Cairns, Louise (s 22)
Subject: FW: Digital Readiness Bill Q&As [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Importance: High
Hi David, Wendy and John
Just wondering if you could provide ok to release these talking points on the Digital Readiness Bill
to the ESO Working Group members.
We have an ESORT videolink tomorrow at 2 pm to go through the Bill. It would be useful if we
could provide the talking points to the ESOWG before that event.
Neil
Neil Bayles
A/g First Assistant Secretary Rehabilitation and Support
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
(02) (s 22)
From: Bayles, Neil
Sent: Friday, 25 November 2016 4:21 PM
To: Roberts, David (s 22)
; Vale, Byron (s 22)
; Harris,
John (s 22)
Cc: Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
; Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)
;
Cairns, Louise (s 22)
; Skivington, Fiona (s 22)
Abeyaratne, Rukshan (s 22)
; Kemp, Robyn
(s 22)
; Summers, Wendy (s 22)
Subject: Digital Readiness Bill Q&As [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Importance: High
Hi David, Bryon and John
Carolyn Spiers, Louise Cairns and I briefed small select sub-group of five representatives of the
ESORT organisations yesterday afternoon on the Digital Readiness Bill that was introduced into
the House that morning.
(s 47C)

Document 6
We are holding a videoconference with the full ESORT membership on the Friday 2 December
afternoon to fully brief the whole roundtable membership. We have sent out to the ESORT
members his afternoon the APH link to the Bill and Explanatory Memorandum in the email invite
to the videoconference and asked ESORT members to call me if they have any concerns.
We have prepared some key messages and Q&As on the Bill. See attached document. These
cover the content of the discussion with the small sub-group.
Contingent on your agreement, we’d like to provide these to the ESORT members by hard copy
on the 2nd.
The small sub-group also asked for talking points and we would like, subject to your agreement,
to provide them with the attached document electronically next week – say Tuesday or
Wednesday. We gave an undertaking to give them some talking points to assist them answer any
concerns raised in the veteran community.
The small sub-group was: (s 47F)
from RAAFA, (s 47F)
from Legacy, Michael von
Berg from Royal Australian Regiment Association, Ken Foster from VVAA, and (s 47F)
of
Defence Force Welfare Association.
Your clearance if possible early next week would be great as there would be benefit in
disseminating this information to respond to any concerns raised in the veteran community.
Neil
Neil Bayles
A/g First Assistant Secretary Rehabilitation and Support
(02) (s 22)

Document 6
DIGITAL READINESS BILL

Key Messages

(s 22)
-
-
-
-

- The public interest disclosure provision will put beyond doubt that the
Secretary may disclose information for certain limited purposes and also
correct miss-truths of fact and misinformation in the community which
leads to deterioration in the public’s confidence in DVA and may
discourage those veterans who need DVA’s assistance from accessing
DVA services.

Index to Talking Points:

Page No Topic
2
(s 22)

3
Public Interest Disclosure
6
(s 22)

9
(s 22)

10
(s 22)

1

Document 6
(s 22)
2

Document 6
Public Interest Disclosure
5.  Why does the Secretary need this power?
  The Privacy Act 1988 legitimately limits the circumstances surrounding the
handling and disclosure of a person’s personal information, as set out in the
Australian Privacy Principles.
  In certain limited circumstances it may be appropriate for the Secretary of the
Department of Veterans’ Affairs to disclose information about a person.
  Such circumstances might include where there is a threat to life, health or
welfare, for the enforcement of laws, in relation to proceeds of crime orders,
mistakes of fact, research and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct
investigations, misinformation in the community and provider inappropriate
practices.
  The purpose of the public interest disclosure provisions is to put beyond doubt
that the Secretary may, in certain circumstances, release information about a
particular case or class of cases.

6.  Why is it important to correct misinformation in the community?
  Misinformation in the public arena about DVA policies, processes and procedures
can have a detrimental effect on veterans’ wellbeing.

o  When there are misconceptions and untruths about DVA’s performance, it
can taint veterans’ interactions with the Department.
o  This in turn can lead to veterans lacking confidence in DVA and becoming
unnecessarily concerned about their case.
o  It may even dissuade veterans from accessing their lawful entitlements.

  (s 47C) , (s 47E)







3

Document 6
  (s 47C) , (s 47E)



7.  What information can the Secretary disclose about me?
  The Secretary may disclose information that was obtained under the relevant Act
(VEA, MRCA or DRCA.)  [This could include personal information.]

8.  Who can the Secretary disclose the information to and for what purposes?
  Before the Secretary exercises this power, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs will
make rules setting out the matters to which the Secretary must have regard in
giving a public interest certificate and the circumstances in which a public
interest certificate may be given.
  The nature and content of those rules is likely to be similar to the Social Security
(Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015.

9.  What safeguards are in place to protect my information?
  There are five specific safeguards built into these new provisions, in addition to
general safeguards already available.

Specific safeguards
  the Secretary must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about
how the power is to be exercised
  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the
power is to be exercised
  the Secretary cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power
  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary must notify
the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, give
the person a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the
proposed disclosure of the information and consider any written comments
made by the person, and
  unless the Secretary complies with the above requirements before disclosing
personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine of
60 penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

General safeguards
  In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and
the Repatriation Commission) manages clients’ personal information in
4

Document 6
compliance with the Privacy Act 1988, and the Department can be required to
pay compensation for breaches of the Privacy Act 1988.
  In addition, departmental staff may face sanctions under the Australian Public
Service Code of Conduct if they handle a client’s personal information in an
unauthorised manner.

10. What can I do if the Secretary discloses information about me and I’m not happy?
  Where the Secretary decides to issue a public interest disclosure certificate, he or
she is required to notify the person in writing about his or her intention to
disclose the information, give the person a reasonable opportunity to make
written comments on the proposed disclosure of the information and consider
any written comments made by the person.
  If a person is dissatisfied with the Secretary’s decision to disclose information
about them, they can apply for judicial review under the Administrative Decisions
(Judicial Review) Act 1977.
  Merits review will not be available because those kinds of remedies are unlikely
to be of benefit and also because of the time frames involved.

o  Remedies:  Where the Secretary has publically released information about a
person, merits review, which examines the correctness of the decision, is
unlikely to be of benefit to the person because their information is already
out in the public.

o  Timeframes:  The timeframe within which information will be released will
depend on the individual circumstances of each case. However, it is very
unlikely that, between becoming aware that the Secretary intends to
disclose information and the release of that information, a person would be
able to obtain merits review. AAT processes while quick and efficient are
unlikely to be available within the space of a few days or a week.

5

Document 6
(s 22)
6

Document 6
(s 22)
7

Document 6
(s 22)

8

Document 6
(s 22)
9

Document 7
From:
Spiers, Carolyn
To:
Cosson, Liz; Foreman, Lisa; Bayles, Neil; Cairns, Louise
Subject:
Digital Readiness Briefing (s 22)
[DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Date:
Thursday, 24 November 2016 5:44:46 PM
All
Neil, Louise and I briefed the ESORT Working group on DR Bill today. It went well, there was
agreement by those present that (s 47C) , (s 47E)
. (s 47C) , (s 47E)
We have
offered to provide the ESORT WG with some talking points about the measures in the Bill to
enable them to communicate with their constituency.
(s 22)
FYI
Carolyn

Document 8
From:
Spiers, Carolyn
To:
"Harris, John (D. Tehan, MP)"; Foreman, Lisa
Cc:
Cairns, Louise
Subject:
FW: Digital Readiness PIA - Final [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Date:
Friday, 24 February 2017 4:47:46 PM
Attachments:
Digital Readiness Bill Privacy Impact Assessment - Final.docx
John / Lisa
Here is the Department’s DR Bill Privacy Impact Assessment. It was prepared by DVA privacy
experts and reviewed /cleared by Australian Government Solicitor privacy lawyers.
FYI
Regards
Carolyn
From: White, Frank
Sent: Friday, 24 February 2017 4:32 PM
To: Spiers, Carolyn ; Cairns, Louise ; Babington, Trent
Subject: Digital Readiness PIA - Final [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
Dear colleagues,
Please find attached the final version of the Digital Readiness Privacy Impact Assessment.
Regards
Frank White
Ext. 616294

Document 8
123456
7

Privacy Impact Assessment Report

Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment

Document 8
(Digital Readiness and Other Measures)
Bil 2016

Public Interest Disclosure Provisions

Document 8

Contents
1) Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1
(s 42)

Document 8

1) Executive Summary

•  The PID provisions relate only to the disclosure of information (including ‘personal
information’ and ‘sensitive information’ as defined in the Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy
Act)) in listed circumstances – in this way, they provide further bases for authorised
disclosure, which operate in addition to the current bases for authorised disclosure
set out in Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 6.
•  In all other respects, any personal information that may potentially be disclosed by
the Department through the operation of the PID provisions is required to be
handled by the Department in accordance with the current APPs relating to
collection, use, quality, security and access.
•  The PID provisions contain detailed and stringent controls over the exercise of the
disclosure power that reflect the importance of taking necessity and proportionality
considerations into account before relying on the provisions to make a disclosure.
•  The requirement that an individual be notified of a proposed disclosure of their
personal information prior to any disclosure being made is an important privacy
safeguard – it will operate to ensure that the power is exercised in appropriate and
necessary cases and will also provide individuals with the opportunity to inform the
Department if information is inaccurate, out of date or incomplete. The requirement
also
•  In some instances, the PID provisions could operate to permit public disclosure of
personal information, rather than disclosure to particular recipients subject to
specific privacy obligations in their own handling of this information – and that this
public disclosure power would be utilised only in circumstances where a significant
public benefit would be served by such action, supplementary procedures should be
developed to assist in assessing the potential consequences, risks and benefits of any
public disclosure.
•  It will be necessary for the Department’s current privacy materials and published
documents to be reviewed and updated to reflect the operation and effect of the
PID provisions. In addition, specific staff training materials and guidelines need to be
prepared to ensure that Departmental employees understand the meaning and
operation of key definitions and tests in the PID provisions and are able to explain
the effect of these changes to Departmental clients and other stakeholders.
•  The recommendations arising from this Assessment are set out at page 27 below.

1

(s 42)

Document 10
From:
Spiers, Carolyn
To:
Cairns, Louise
Subject:
FW: DVA Clarification on Ombudsman submission - DVA Digital Readiness Bill [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Tuesday, 21 February 2017 4:29:49 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
Importance:
High
From: Doris Gibb (s 22)

Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2017 1:57 PM
To: Spiers, Carolyn
Cc: Kate Wandmaker ; Diane Mutch ; Rodney Walsh ; Richard Glenn
Subject: DVA Clarification on Ombudsman submission - DVA Digital Readiness Bill [DLM=For-
Official-Use-Only]
Importance: High
Dear Carolyn
Thank you for forwarding the clarification for our information.
Regards
Doris Gibb
Acting Deputy Ombudsman
COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN
Phone: (s 22)
Email: (s 22)
Website: ombudsman.gov.au
Influencing systemic improvement in public administration
From: Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)

Sent: Monday, 20 February 2017 8:45 AM
To: Ombudsman (s 22)
Subject: DVA Digital Readiness Bill [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Importance: High
Ms Doris Gibbs
Senior Assistant Ombudsman
Dear Ms Gibbs
DVA has provided the Senate Committee with a short supplementary submission after
Thursday’s hearing to clarify a couple of issues raised during the hearing concerning the
operation of the Schedule 2 of the Bill. As the timing of the hearing was quite short and the
committee asked many questions, it was not possible to handle the clarification during the
hearing. As it relates to one of the submissions made the Ombudsman’s Office, I thought it
would be appropriate to forward a copy.
If you wish to discuss further, I can be contacted on (s 22)
Regards
Carolyn Spiers
Principal Legal Advisor
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
From: Spiers, Carolyn
Sent: Friday, 17 February 2017 12:36 PM
To: (s 22)

Document 10
Cc: Cairns, Louise (s 22)
>; Foreman, Lisa <(s 22)
;
Brown, Luke <(s 22)
>
Subject: Further info for Committee re DR Bill - Cth O supp submission [DLM=For-Official-Use-
Only]
Importance: High
Dear Mr Sullivan,
As I mentioned to you at the conclusion of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade
Committee’s inquiry into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and
Other Measures) Bill 2016 (Digital Readiness Bill), there is one aspect of the Commonwealth
Ombudsman’s supplementary submission that the Department of Veterans’ Affairs would like to
clarify.
Schedule 2 of the Digital Readiness Bill contains two types of information sharing provisions.
Items 1, 7 and 10 of Schedule 2 are the proposed public information disclosure provisions. Items
3 – 6 are the proposed information sharing provisions between the Department of Veterans’
Affairs and the Department of Defence/Chief of the Defence Force.
The excerpt of the Explanatory Memorandum quoted in the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s
supplementary submission relates to items 3 – 6 (information sharing between DVA and
Defence), not the entire schedule 2. Thus the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s comment that the
amendments in Schedule 2 appear to exceed the quoted excerpt from the Explanatory
Memorandum is correct, but this is because the excerpt relates to items 3 – 6 (information
sharing between DVA and Defence), not items 1, 7 and 10 (public information disclosure
provisions.)
The Commonwealth Ombudsman suggested that the anomaly (that the Military Rehabilitation
and Compensation Commission can share information with the Department of Defence under
the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA), but not the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (SRCA)) could be overcome by mirroring the existing
MRCA provision (section 409) in the SRCA and Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), rather than
introducing new expanded provisions to all three pieces of legislation.
Item 5 of Schedule 2 inserts an equivalent of section 409 of the MRCA into the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA), subject to it being
enacted. It is not necessary to make the equivalent amendment to the VEA because it already
has an information sharing provision at section 130.
Items 1, 7 and 10 are not designed to overcome the anomaly mentioned above. They are
designed to achieve a separate policy outcome of putting beyond doubt that, in certain limited
circumstances and subject to rules made by the Minister, the Secretary of the Department of
Veterans’ Affairs may make a public interest disclosure where it is in the public interest to do so.
As discussed yesterday, misinformation in the public arena about DVA’s policies, processes and
procedures can have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of veterans.
Thank you for allowing the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to provide this further information to
the Committee and I would be happy to provide any further information if that would assist
members of the Committee.
Regards,
Carolyn Spiers.
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,

Document 10
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go to
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
The Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman acknowledges the traditional owners of
country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, culture and
community. We pay our respects to elders past and present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN - IMPORTANT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail message or an attachment to it is confidential, and it is intended to be accessed
only by the person or entity to which it is addressed.
No use, copying or disclosure (including by further transmission) of this message, an
attachment or the content of either is permitted and any use, copying or disclosure may be
subject to legal sanctions. This message may contain information which is:
* about an identifiable individual;
* subject to client legal privilege or other privilege; or
* subject to a statutory or other requirement of confidentiality.
If you have received this message in error, please call 1300 362 072 to inform the sender
so that future errors can be avoided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 11
From:
Cairns, Louise
To:
ESO.Round.Table
Subject:
RE: ESORT - 2 page summary of DVA submission to Senate inquiry [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Attachments:
Summary of DVA submission to Senate Inquiry.docx
Hi ESORT Secretariat,
I’m not sure whether the minutes and documents from the 1 February ESORT workshop went
out? I happened to look at the document I sent you on 8 February and realised it’s the wrong
version. Please find attached the correct version to be sent out.
Thanks very much,
Louise.
From: Cairns, Louise
Sent: Wednesday, 8 February 2017 10:52 AM
To: ESO.Round.Table
Subject: FW: ESORT - 2 page summary of DVA submission to Senate inquiry [DLM=For-Official-
Use-Only]
Hi ESORT Secretariat,
At last week’s ESORT workshop on the Digital Readiness Bill (01/02/17), we agreed to provide
ESORT members with a two page summary of DVA’s submission to the Senate inquiry. Please
find attached the summary to be distributed (perhaps with the minutes?) Craig, Lisa and Carolyn
have cleared the document.
Regards,
Louise.
From: Orme, Craig
Sent: Wednesday, 8 February 2017 10:26 AM
To: Cairns, Louise (s 22)
Cc: Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)
Subject: Re: ESORT - 2 page summary of DVA submission to Senate inquiry [DLM=For-Official-
Use-Only]
All good. It can go out.
Craig
On 8 Feb 2017, at 09:16, Cairns, Louise (s 22)
wrote:
Hi Craig,
I understand you’re working from Sydney today and tomorrow –Louise suggested
that I email you.
At last week’s ESORT workshop on the Digital Readiness Bill, we agreed to provide a
two page summary of DVA’s submission to the Senate inquiry to ESORT members.
I’ve drafted the two pager (attached), which Carolyn and Lisa have both cleared.
When you have a chance, could you also please consider and let me know whether
you’d like any changes made?
Also, would you like Liz and the Secretary to clear this paper?
Thanks very much,
Louise.

Document 11
Summary of DVA’s submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Digital Readiness Bil
(s 22)

Public Interest Disclosures
DVA has a duty of care in providing its services to veterans and clients. However, often there are privacy
and legislative restraints on providing information that might be necessary in fulfilling that duty of care. In
instances of preventing harm to others or self-harm, addressing concerns about a veteran’s health,
maintaining the integrity of programmes, and ensuring appropriate service provision by providers, the
Department is not able in some instances to provide timely information to prevent detrimental outcomes
to veterans.
Public Interest Disclosures are currently used in other areas of government in a careful and judicious
manner that al ows these issues to be addressed. It is important that measures that are in place and
working in other areas of government are afforded to DVA in order to fulfil its duty of care to veterans and
clients and provide the best outcome for them.

Document 11
In recognition that DVA has not previously had this public interest disclosure power, and that disclosure of
a person’s information is not to be undertaken lightly, five specific safeguards are built into the proposed
provisions, in addition to general safeguards already available.

The specific safeguards include:
•  the Secretary of DVA must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about how the
power is to be exercised and the rules will be a disallowable instrument
•  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the power is to be
exercised by the Secretary of DVA
•  the Secretary of DVA cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power
•  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary of DVA must notify the
person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, give the person a
reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed disclosure of the
information and consider any written comments made by the person (natural justice
requirements), and
•  unless the Secretary of DVA complies with the above natural justice requirements before
disclosing personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine of 60
penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and the Repatriation
Commission) manages clients’ personal information in compliance with the Privacy Act 1988, and the
Department can be required to pay compensation for breaches of the Privacy Act 1988. In addition,
departmental staff may face sanctions under the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct if they handle a
client’s personal information in an unauthorised manner.  If a person is dissatisfied with the Secretary’s
decision to disclose information about them, they can apply for judicial review under the Administrative
Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977.
(s 22)

Document 12
From:
McNaught Karri on behalf of ESO.Round.Table
Subject:
ESORT - Digital Readiness Bill Meeting 1 - Draft Minutes - 2 December 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Wednesday, 14 December 2016 3:53:52 PM
Attachments:
F2015L01267.pdf
DR EM.PDF
DR 2RS.PDF
DR Bill.pdf
ESORT Draft Minutes - Digital Readiness - 2 December 2016 docx
Good afternoon,
Please find attached the draft minutes of the Digital Readiness meeting held on 2 December 2016 for your consideration.
Digital Readiness Bill
Further information about the Digital Readiness Bill can be found at the following link, where you can track the progress of
the Bill including the text of the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum, the Minister’s Second Reading Speech, and second reading
debate (when it occurs): http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?
bId=r5771
Please find attached copies of the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and Second Reading Speech.
As mentioned at the meeting, the Digital Readiness Bill has been referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade
Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 14 February 2017, with submissions due by 25 January 2017. Here is a link to
the inquiry homepage:
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/VetAffairsDigitalBill
Finally in relation to the Digital Readiness Bill, please find attached a copy of DSS’ rules about when the Secretaries of DSS and
DHS may exercise their public interest disclosure provisions. DVA’s rules are under development, but will be broadly
modelled on DSS’.
(s 22)
Please contact the ESORT Secretariat if you require any further assistance.
Thank you
Karri

Document 12

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate
Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
Social Security (Administration) Act 1999
I, Scott Morrison, Minister for Social Services, make this Determination under
paragraph 209(a) of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999.

Dated: 6 August 2015

Scott Morrison

Minister for Social Services

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12
Part 1
Preliminary

1
Name of Determination

  This  Determination  is  the  Social  Security  (Public  Interest  Certificate
Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015.
2
Commencement

  This Determination commences on the day after it is registered.
3
Revocation

  The  Social  Security  (Public  Interest  Certificate  Guidelines)  (DSS)
Determination 2014 is revoked.
3A
Savings provision

  Despite  the  revocation  in  section  3,  the  Social  Security  (Public  Interest
Certificate  Guidelines)  (DSS)  Determination  2014  continues  in  force  in
relation  to  public  interest  certificates  made  under  and  in  accordance  with
that instrument.
4
Purpose

  The purpose of this Determination is to set out guidelines for the exercise of
the Secretary’s power to give certificates  under paragraph 208(1)(a) of the
Act.
5
Definitions

  In this Determination:
Act means the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999.
APS  Code  of  Conduct  has  the  same  meaning  as  in  the
Public Service Act 1999.
Department means the Department of Social Services.
Human Services Department means the Department of Human Services.
Minister means, as the context permits:

(a)  a Minister of State administering any part of:

(i)  the social security law; or

(ii)  the family assistance law; or

(iii)  the Human Services (Centrelink) Act 1997; or

(iv)  the Human Services (Medicare) Act 1973; and

(b)  the Prime Minister.
public interest certificate means a certificate, under paragraph 208(1)(a) of
the Act, for the disclosure of relevant information.
relevant  information  means  information  about  a  person  (including
protected information) acquired by an officer in  the performance of his  or

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
3

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

her  functions  or  duties,  or  in  the  exercise  of  his  or  her  powers,  under  the
social security law or the Farm Household Support Act 2014.
Note 1 The following expressions are defined in the Act:
  1991 Act
  social security law.
Note 2 The following expressions are defined in the 1991 Act and have the same meaning
in the Act (see subsection 3(2) of the Act):
  family member
  officer
  protected information
  Secretary
  social security payment.
6
Matters to which Secretary must have regard

  In giving a public interest certificate, the Secretary must have regard to:

(a)  any situation in which the person to whom the information relates is, or
may be, subject to physical, psychological or emotional abuse; and

(b)  whether the person in such a situation may be unable to give notice of
his or her circumstances because of:

  (i)
age; or

  (ii)
disability; or

  (iii)
social, cultural, family or other reasons.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
4

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

Part 2
Guidelines — public interest certificate
(general)
7
When public interest certificate may be given

(1)  The  Secretary  may  give  a  public  interest  certificate  for  the  disclosure  of
relevant information under this Part if:

(a)  the information cannot reasonably be obtained from a source other than
the Department or the Human Services Department; and

(b)  the  person  to  whom  the  information  will  be  disclosed  has  sufficient
interest in the information; and

(c)  the  Secretary  is  satisfied  that  the  disclosure  is  for  the  purpose  of
sections 8, 9, 9A, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16A, 17, 17A, 17B, 17C,
18, 18A, or 18B of this Determination.

(2)  A person has sufficient interest in the relevant information if:

(a)  the  Secretary  is  satisfied  that,  in  relation  to  the  purpose  of  the
disclosure,  the  person  has  a  genuine  and  legitimate  interest  in  the
information; or

(b)  the person is a Minister.
8
Threat to life, health or welfare

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure  is  necessary  to  prevent,  or  lessen,  a  threat  to  the  life,  health  or
welfare of a person.
9
Enforcement of laws

(1)  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if:

(a)  the disclosure is necessary:

(i)  for the enforcement of a criminal law that relates to an indictable
offence punishable by imprisonment of 2 years or more; or

(ii)  for  the  enforcement  of  a  law  imposing  a  pecuniary  penalty
equivalent to 40 penalty units or more; or

(iii)  to prevent an act that may have a significant adverse effect on the
public revenue; or

(b)  the disclosure relates to an offence or threatened offence:

(i)  against a Commonwealth employee; or

(ii)  against Commonwealth property; or

(iii)  in Department premises; or

(iv)  in the premises of the Human Services Department.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
5

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

(2)  In this section:
criminal law means:

(a)  for Australia — a criminal law of the Commonwealth or of a State or
Territory; and

(b)  for a place outside Australia — a criminal law that may be recognised
under an extradition arrangement to which Australia is a party.
penalty  unit  has  the  same  meaning  as  in  section 4AA  of  the
Crimes Act 1914.
Note Subsection 4AA(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 provides:
‘In  a  law  of  the  Commonwealth  or  a  Territory  Ordinance,  unless  the  contrary
intention appears:
penalty unit means $170.’.
9A
Proceeds of crime order
(1)   Relevant  information  may  be  disclosed  to  a  Commonwealth,  State  or
Territory  law  enforcement  agency  for  the  purpose  of  this  section  if  the
disclosure is necessary for:
(a) the making, or proposed or possible making, of a proceeds of crime order;
or
(b) supporting or enforcing a proceeds of crime order.
(2)  In this section proceeds of crime order means:
(a) an order under:
(i)  Chapter  2  (the  confiscation  scheme)  or  Division  1,  Part  3-1  of
Chapter 3 (examination orders) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002;
or
(ii) Part II (confiscation) or III (control of property liable to confiscation)
of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1987; or
(iii) a  State  law  or  Territory  law  corresponding  to  a  law  referred  to  in
subparagraph (i) or (ii); or
(iv)  Division 3 of Part XIII (recovery of pecuniary penalties for dealings
in narcotic goods) of the Customs Act 1901; or
(b)    an  unexplained  wealth  order  (within  the  meaning  of  the  Proceeds  of
Crime Act 2002); or
(c) a court order (including a declaration or direction):
(i)   under a State law or Territory law; and
   (ii) relating to unexplained wealth.
10
Mistake of fact

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if:

(a)  the disclosure is necessary to correct a mistake of fact in relation to the
administration of a program of the Department; and

(b)  either:

(i)  the integrity of the program will be at risk if the mistake of fact is
not corrected; or

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
6

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

(ii)  the  mistake  of  fact  relates  to  a  matter  that  was,  or  will  be,
published  (whether  by,  or  with  or  without  the  consent  of,  the
person to whom the information relates).
11
Ministerial briefing

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure is necessary:

(a)  to  brief  a  Minister  so  that  the  Minister  can  consider  complaints  or
issues raised by or on behalf of a person with the Minister (in writing
or orally), and respond to that person in  relation to  the  complaints or
issues; or

(b)  to brief a Minister for a meeting or forum that the Minister is to attend;
or

(c)  to brief a Minister in relation to issues raised or proposed to be raised
publicly  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  person  to  whom  the  relevant
information  relates  so  that  the  Minister  can  respond  by  correcting  a
mistake of fact, a misleading perception or impression, or a misleading
statement; or

(d)  to  brief  a  Minister  about  an  error  or  delay  on  the  part  of  the  Human
Services Department; or

(e)  to  brief  a  Minister  about  an  instance  of  an  anomalous  or  unusual
operation of the social security law.

12
Missing person

  Relevant  information  may  be disclosed  to a  court,  coronial  inquiry, Royal
Commission,  department or any  other  authority  of a State or Territory  for
the purpose of this section if:

(a)  the information is about a reported missing person; and

(b)  the disclosure is necessary:

(i)  to assist a court, coronial inquiry, Royal Commission, department
or  any  other  authority  of  a  State  or  Territory  in  relation  to  the
whereabouts of the missing person; or

(ii)  to locate a person (including the missing person); and

(c)  there is no reasonable ground to believe that the missing person would
not want the information disclosed.
13
Deceased person

(1)  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this subsection if:

(a)  the information is about a deceased person; and

(b)  the disclosure:

(i)  is  necessary  to  assist  a  court,  coronial  inquiry,  Royal
Commission,  department,  or  any  other  authority  of  a  State  or
Territory in relation to the death of the person; or

(ii)  is  necessary  to  help  a  person  locate  a  relative  or  beneficiary  of
the deceased person; or

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
7

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

(iii)  is necessary to help an individual or authority responsible for the
administration of the estate of the deceased person in relation to
the administration of the estate of the deceased person; or

  (iv)  is  in  relation  to  the  Human  Services  Department  transferring
information to the relevant authority responsible for administering
the  social  security  system  in  another  country  regarding  the
deceased person who, prior to their death, was qualified for or in
receipt  of  an  Australian  social  security  payment  or  held  a
Commonwealth Seniors Health Card; and

(c)  there is no reasonable ground to believe that the deceased person would
not have wanted the relevant information disclosed.

(2)  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this subsection if
the information is to establish:

(a)  the death of a person; or

(b)  the place where the death of a person is registered.

14
School enrolment and attendance

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure is necessary to ensure a child who:

(a)  is required to be enrolled in a school under a law of a State or Territory
is enrolled; or

(b)  is required to be attending a school under a law of a State or Territory
is attending.
15
School infrastructure

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure  is  necessary  to  plan  for,  meet  or  monitor  infrastructure  and
resource needs in one or more schools.
16
Public housing administration
Relevant information may be disclosed to a department or any other authority
of  a  State  or  Territory  or  an  agent  or  contracted  service  provider  of  a
department or authority for the purpose of this section if:
(a)
the information is about a resident, an applicant to become a tenant,  or
a tenant of public housing or other State or Territory managed housing;
and
(b)
the  disclosure  is  necessary  to  facilitate  rent  calculation  or  rent
deduction in relation to public housing, or State or Territory managed
housing; or
(c)
the disclosure is necessary to facilitate the administration of an income
confirmation service in relation to public housing or State or Territory
managed housing to avoid mistakes, underpayments and overpayments
of rent, pensions, benefits and allowances; or

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
8

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

(d)    the disclosure is necessary to investigate or take enforcement action in
relation  to  public  housing  or  State  or  Territory  managed  housing
including to assist with an investigation into either:
(i)   the misreporting of income by tenants of public housing or State or
Territory managed housing; or
(ii) the unauthorised occupation of public housing or State or Territory
managed housing by any person.
16A  Vulnerable Welfare Payment Income Management measure

  Relevant information may be disclosed to:

  (a)  a department or any other authority of a State or Territory; or

  (b)  an  agent  or  contracted  service  provider  of  such  a  department  or  any
other authority of a State or Territory;

for the purpose of this section if:

  (c)  the information is about a resident, an applicant to become a tenant, or
a tenant of public housing or other State or Territory managed housing; and

  (d)  the  disclosure  is  necessary  to  facilitate  the  administration  of  the
vulnerable  welfare  payment  recipient  income  management  measure,
including through the provision of information:

(i)  about a person’s social security payment arrangements (including
any nominee arrangement and usual place of residence) to assist
one of the bodies referred to in paragraphs (a) or (b) in deciding
about  whether  to  refer  a  person  to  the  Secretary  for  possible
subjection to income management; or

(ii)  about  whether  the  person  is  subject  to  the  vulnerable  welfare
payment  recipient  income  management  measure  and  details  of
this  arrangement  (including  details  about  a  person’s  payment
rate,  qualification,  any  nominee  arrangement,  usual  place  of
residence and any subsequent cessation of income management);
or

(iii)  about  whether  a  referral  referred  to  in  subparagraph  (i)  has  not
led  to  a  person  being  made  subject  to  income  management  and
the reasons for this; or

(iv)  to  assist  in  minimising  the  risk  or  effect  of  eviction  or
homelessness in relation to a person.
17
Establishment and operation of the Family Responsibilities
Commission

(1)  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure is necessary:
(a)  for the establishment of the Family Responsibilities Commission; or
(b)  to  assist  in  the  performance  of  the  functions,  or  the  exercise  of  the
powers, of the Family Responsibilities Commission.

(2)  In this section, Family Responsibilities Commission means the Commission
established  by  section 9  of  the  Family  Responsibilities  Commission
Act 2008 (Qld).

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
9

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

17A  Reparations

  Relevant  information  may  be  disclosed  to  a  department  or  any  other
authority  of  a  State  or  Territory  for  the  purpose  of  this  section  if  the
disclosure is necessary for the purpose of contacting the person in respect of
their possible entitlement to compensation or other form of recompense in a
reparation process.
17B  Child protection agencies

(1)  Relevant  information  may  be  disclosed  to  a  Child  Protection  agency  of  a
State  or  Territory  for  the  purpose  of  this  section  if  the  disclosure  is
necessary for the purpose of contacting the parent or relative in relation to
the child.

(2)  In  this  section,  Child  Protection  agency  means  a  government  agency  that
carries out child protection functions.
17C   Public utilities
(1)  Where:
(a)  a  customer  of  a  public  utility  (the  first  public  utility)  has  provided
consent to that public utility to enable it to confirm the entitlement of
the customer to a social security related concession; and
(b) responsibility for the provision of services to the customer by the first
public  utility  has  been  transferred,  in  whole  or  in  part,  to  another
public utility (the second public utility); and
(c)  as  a  result  of  the  transfer  of  responsibility  for  the  provision  of
services, the customer of the first public utility became a customer of
the second public utility; and
(d) where necessary, the second public utility advises the Commonwealth
of the contact details of the customer;

relevant information may be disclosed to the second public utility for the
purpose of this section if the disclosure is necessary to enable the second
public  utility  to  confirm  the  entitlement  of  the  customer  to  a  social
security related concession.
(2)  In this section, public utility means a legal entity that provides, or is related
to a legal entity that provides, any of the  following services to the public:
(a)  water;
(b) sewerage;
(c)  gas;
(d) electricity; or
(e)  telecommunications.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
10

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

18
Matters of relevance

(1)  Subject  to  subsection  (2),  relevant  information  may  be  disclosed  for  the
purpose  of  this  section  if  the  disclosure  is  necessary  for  the  purpose  of
facilitating  the  progress  or  resolution  of  matters  of  relevance  within  the
portfolio  responsibilities  of  a  department  that  is  administering  any  part  of
the family assistance law or the social security law.

(2)  In this section, a matter of relevance to a department includes a programme
or  activity  that  provides  assistance  or  services  to  a  class  of  people  that
includes at least some persons receiving payments or entitlements under the
social security law or the family assistance law.
18A  Research and statistical analysis

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure is necessary for the purpose of:
(a)    research into (including evaluation or monitoring of, or reporting on)
matters of relevance to a department that is administering any part of
the family assistance law or the social security law; or
(b)    statistical analysis of those matters.
18B  APS Code of Conduct investigations

Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure is necessary for the purpose of:
(a)    investigating suspected breaches of the APS Code of Conduct; and
(b)    making  a  decision  on  whether  the  APS  Code  of  Conduct  has  been
breached.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
11

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

Part 3
Guidelines — public interest certificate
(homeless young person)

19
Application

(1)  This  Part  applies  if  the  relevant  information  for  disclosure  relates  to  a
homeless young person.

(2)  In this Part:
homeless young person means a person:

(a)  who is under 18 years; and

(b)  who  has  sought  a  social  security  payment  on  the  ground  of  being  a
homeless person.
parent, in relation to a homeless young person, means:

(a)  a natural parent, adoptive parent or relationship parent of the homeless
young  person  with  whom  the  homeless  young  person  normally  lived
before becoming a homeless young person; or

(b)  if  a  parent  referred  to  in  paragraph  (a)  is  a  member  of  a  couple  and
normally  lives  with  the  other  member  of  the  couple —  the  other
member of the couple; or

(c)  any other person (other than the homeless  young person’s partner) on
whom  the  homeless  young  person  was  wholly  or  substantially
dependent before becoming a homeless young person.
20
When public interest certificate may be given

(1)  The  Secretary  may  give  a  public  interest  certificate  for  the  disclosure  of
relevant information under this Part if:

(a)  the information cannot reasonably be obtained from a source other than
the Department; and

(b)  the Secretary is  satisfied that the disclosure will not  result in  harm to
the homeless young person; and

(c)  the  Secretary  is  satisfied  that  the  disclosure  is  for  the  purpose  of
section 21, 22, 23 or 24.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
12

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12

(2)  The Secretary may also give a public interest certificate for the disclosure of
relevant information under this Part if:

(a)  the information cannot reasonably be obtained from a source other than
the Department; and

(b)  the  disclosure  will  be  made  to  a  welfare  authority  of  a  State  or
Territory; and

(c)  the homeless young person to whom the relevant information relates is:

(i)  in  the  care  of  a  welfare  authority  of  a  State  or  Territory  in
accordance with the law of the State or Territory; or

(ii)  under 15 years; and

(d)  the Secretary is  satisfied that the disclosure will not  result in  harm to
the homeless young person.
21
Abuse or violence

  Relevant  information  may  be  disclosed  to  an  appropriate  authority  for  the
purpose of this section if:

(a)  the information is about a family member of a homeless young person;
and

(b)  the  Secretary  is  satisfied  that  the  homeless  young  person  or  a  family
member of the homeless young person has been subjected to abuse or
violence.
22
Verification for payment

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if:

(a)  the  disclosure  is  necessary  to  verify  a  circumstance  by  which  a
homeless young person who is under 15 years may qualify for a social
security payment on the ground of being a homeless person; and

(b)  in  order  to  verify  the  circumstance,  a  parent,  or  the  parents,  of  the
homeless  young  person  must  be  asked  whether  the  homeless  young
person is able to live at the home of his or her parent or parents.
23
Reconciliation

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if the
disclosure will facilitate reconciliation, or possible reconciliation, between a
homeless young person and his or her parent or parents.
24
Assurance

  Relevant information may be disclosed for the purpose of this section if:

(a)  a  parent,  or  the  parents,  of  a  homeless  young  person  has  sought
assurance that the homeless young person has been in contact with the
Department or with the Human Services Department; and

(b)  the disclosure is necessary to inform the parent or parents whether the
homeless  young  person  has  been  in  contact  with  the  Department  or
with the Human Services Department.

Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015
13

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments F2015L01267

Document 12
2016

THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

VETERANS’ AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (DIGITAL READINESS AND
OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2016

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs,
The Honourable Dan Tehan MP)

Document 12

Document 12
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (DIGITAL
READINESS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2016

OUTLINE
The Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) is undertaking veteran centric reform to
significantly improve services for veterans and their families by re-engineering DVA
business processes.

In anticipation of planned business and ICT reforms that will reduce claims
processing times and automate and streamline existing processes, legislative
amendment is required to make the Department of Veterans’ Affairs digitally ready in
a legal sense, in line with the Government’s broad digital transformation agenda.

The Bill inserts a provision in each of the VEA, MRCA and DRCA that would enable
the Secretary to authorise the use of computer programmes to make decisions and
determinations, exercise powers or comply with obligations and do anything else
related to making decisions and determinations or exercising powers or complying
with obligations under those Acts, and legislative instruments made under those Acts.

The Bill also inserts a provision in each of the VEA, MRCA and DRCA that would
enable the Secretary to disclose information about a particular case or class of cases to
such persons and for such purposes as the Secretary determines, if he or she certifies
that it is necessary in the public interest to do so.

This power is accompanied by appropriate safeguards including that the power cannot
be delegated by the Secretary to anyone, the Secretary must act in accordance with
rules that the Minister makes, the Minister cannot delegate his or her rule making
power, there are limits on disclosing personal information and, unless the Secretary
complies with certain requirements before disclosing personal information, he or she
commits an offence, punishable by 60 penalty units.

The Bill also inserts three information sharing provisions in the DRCA between the
Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission and the Secretary of the
Department of Defence or the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF).  The obligation to
provide claims information in relation to serving members under the SRCA is more
limited than under the MRCA.  These amendments will create consistency between
the two Acts.

Finally, the Bill makes very two minor technical amendments to the VEA that were
intended to be made as part of the Statute Update Act 2016, but which were
overlooked, as well as a minor and technical amendment to the short title of the
DRCA.

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

None.

1

Document 12
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act
2011

VETERANS’ AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT
(DIGITAL READINESS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2016

Schedule 1 – Computerised decision-making

Schedule 1 of the Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised
or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview

The amendments in Schedule 1 insert a provision into each of the VEA, MRCA and
DRCA, which would enable the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to
authorise the use of computer programmes to make decisions and determinations,
exercise powers or comply with obligations and do anything else related to making
decisions and determinations or exercising powers or complying with obligations
under those Acts, and legislative instruments made under those Acts.

Human rights implications

Schedule 1 does not engage any human rights issues as it simply enables a computer
programme to be authorised by the Secretary to make decisions that would otherwise
be able to be made by either the Repatriation Commission or Military Rehabilitation
and Compensation Commission (MRCC.) It makes no change to the substance of the
law.

Conclusion

Schedule 1 is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011, as it does not engage any of the applicable rights
or freedoms or alter any human rights safeguards currently in place.

2

Document 12

Schedule 2 – Disclosure of information

Schedule 2 is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview
The amendments in Schedule 2 insert a provision in each of the VEA, MRCA and
DRCA that would enable the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to
disclose information about a particular case or class of cases to such persons and for
such purposes as the Secretary determines, if he or she certifies that it is necessary in
the public interest to do so.  Several safeguards have been incorporated into the Bill to
ensure that the power will be exercised appropriately.

Schedule 2 also inserts two information sharing provisions into the DRCA. The
information sharing provisions are based on equivalent provisions under the MRCA
and are designed to align information sharing between the MRCC and the Secretary
of the Department of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force across both Acts.

Human rights implications

Schedule 2 engages the following human right:

Privacy

The right to privacy and reputation is contained in article 17 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR.)

Public interest disclosure

The Privacy Act 1988 legitimately limits the circumstances surrounding the handling
and disclosure of a person’s personal information, as set out in the Australian Privacy
Principles. The amendments are designed to put beyond doubt that the Secretary
may, in certain limited circumstances, release information about a case or class of
cases.

Examples of the circumstances in which it might be appropriate for the Secretary to
disclose information about a case or class of cases include where there is a threat to
life, health or welfare, for the enforcement of laws, in relation to proceeds of crime
orders, mistakes of fact, research and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct
investigations, misinformation in the community and provider inappropriate practices.

The amendments would achieve this because they would enable the Secretary to
disclose information about a particular case or class of cases to such persons and for
such purposes as the Secretary determines, if he or she certifies that it is necessary in
the public interest to do so.
3

Document 12

Importantly, several safeguards have been incorporated into the Bill to ensure that the
power will be exercised appropriately:
  the Secretary must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about
how the power is to be exercised
  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the
power is to be exercised to anyone
  the Secretary cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power to anyone
  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary must
notify the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the
information, give the person a reasonable opportunity to make written
comments on the proposed disclosure of the information and consider any
written comments made by the person, and
  unless the Secretary complies with the above requirements before disclosing
personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine
of 60 penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

Significantly, any interference with a person’s privacy will not be arbitrary under the
proposed provisions because, if the Secretary proposes to disclose personal
information about a person, he or she must first notify the person in writing about his
or her intention to disclose the information, give the person a reasonable opportunity
to make written comments on the proposed disclosure of the information and consider
any written comments made by the person before disclosing the personal information.
Further, the rules to be made by the Minister (which the Secretary must follow) would
set out the matters to which the Secretary must have regard in giving a public interest
certificate and the circumstances in which a public interest certificate may be given.

Information sharing provisions

The amendments are designed to overcome an anomaly that currently exists between
the MRCA and the SRCA. The anomaly is that the MRCC is unable to provide the
same sort of information to the Secretary of the Department of Defence or the Chief
of the Defence Force under the SRCA about current serving members as it is able to
under the MRCA.

This reflects the historical development and context of the two Acts. However, with
the re-enactment of the SRCA as the DRC, it is important that the Secretary of the
Department of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force are able to receive the
same sort of information about all serving members, particularly in the context of
monitoring occupational health and safety or for monitoring the cost to the
Commonwealth of a service injury or a service disease.

The amendments would achieve this by aligning information sharing provisions under
the DRCA with those in the MRCA.

Importantly, in each of the proposed information sharing provisions, the sort of
information, the purposes for which and the persons to whom it could be disclosed are
4

Document 12
appropriately prescribed and limited, consistent with the equivalent provisions in the
MRCA.

Conclusion

Schedule 2 is compatible with human rights as, to the extent that it may limit human
rights, those limitations are reasonable, necessary and proportionate.

5

Document 12

Schedule 3 – Technical amendments

Schedule 3 is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview

The amendments in Schedule 3 update provisions to take account of changes to
drafting precedents and practices. In particular, references to penalties expressed as a
number of dollars will be updated with penalties expressed as a number of penalty
units.

These amendments will ensure that older provisions on the Commonwealth statute
book continue to be expressed in ways that are consistent with the overall legal
context in which they operate and reflect changes to the law. The amendments also
enhance readability, facilitate interpretation and administration, and promote
consistency across the Commonwealth statute book.

There is also one minor and technical change to amend the short title of the DRCA.

Human rights implications

Schedule 3 does not engage any human rights issues as it makes minor technical
corrections and technical improvements. It makes either no change, or only minor
changes, to the substance of the law.

Conclusion

Schedule 3 is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011, as it does not engage any of the applicable rights
or freedoms or alter any human rights safeguards currently in place.

6

Document 12
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (DIGITAL
READINESS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2016

Short Title
Clause 1 provides for the short title of the Act to be the
Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness
and Other Measures) Act 2016.

Commencement
Clause 2 sets out the commencement date of the provisions of
the Act.

Schedules
Clause 3 provides that legislation that is specified in a Schedule
to this Act is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable
items in the Schedule concerned, and any other item in a
Schedule to this Act has effect according to its terms.

This explanatory memorandum uses the following abbreviations:

“DRCA” means the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related
Claims) Act 1988;

“MRCA” means the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004;

“MRCC” means the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission;

“SRCA” means the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988;

“the Department” means the Department of Veterans’ Affairs;

“the Secretary” means the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs; and

“VEA” means the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986.

7

Document 12
Schedule 1 – Computerised decision-making

Overview

Items 1, 3 and 5 of Schedule 1 insert a provision into each of the MRCA, DRCA and
the VEA, respectively, that would enable the Secretary to authorise the use of
computer programmes to make decisions and determinations, exercise powers or
comply with obligations and do anything else related to making decisions and
determinations or exercising powers or complying with obligations under those Acts,
and legislative instruments made under those Acts.

Background

The Department is undertaking veteran centric reform to significantly improve
services for veterans and their families by re-engineering the Department’s business
processes.

In anticipation of planned business and ICT reforms that will reduce claims
processing times and automate and streamline existing processes, legislative
amendment is required to make the Department digitally ready in a legal sense, in line
with the Government’s broad digital transformation agenda.

Explanation of the Items

In relation to items 1 and 3, which will amend the MRCA and the DRCA, the
Secretary will be enabled to arrange for computer programmes to be used to:
  make decisions or determinations
  exercise powers or comply with obligations, or
  do anything else related to the above two dot points
which the MRCC can do under those Acts or legislative instruments made under those
Acts.

In the context of this reform, these provisions would enable the Secretary to arrange
for a computer programme to do anything else related to making a decision or
determination or exercising a power or complying with an obligation. For example,
where a particular provision requires notice of a decision to be given, the computer
programme may both make the decision and send the notice, thus automating parts of
the Department’s business and improving outcomes for clients.

Subitem (2) of items 1 and 3 provides that actions undertaken by the operation of a
computer programme under subitem (1) are taken to be actions of the MRCC.

Subitem (3) of items 1 and 3 would enable the MRCC to substitute a decision or
determination made by a computer programme (which by virtue of subitem (2) it is
taken to have made) if the MRCC is satisfied that the decision or determination is
incorrect.

8

Document 12
This provision would enable a delegate of the MRCC to intervene and substitute a
decision or determination where a computer programme has produced an incorrect
outcome. The MRCC will be able to exercise this power on “own motion,” without
the need for a person to request review of an incorrect decision or determination made
by a computer programme.

Subitem (4) of items 1 and 3 makes it clear that this substituted
decision/determination power does not affect or limit Chapter 8 with respect to item 1
(reconsideration and review of determinations under the MRCA) or Part VI with
respect to item 3 (reconsideration and review of determinations under the DRCA.)

The substituted decision/determination power is intended to give the MRCC the
ability to undertake own motion review for any incorrect decisions or determinations
made by the operation of a computer programme, particularly in relation to decisions
and determinations made under legislative instruments under the MRCA and the
DRCA.

Item 5 is the same as items 1 and 3, except that it amends the VEA and will enable
the Secretary to arrange for computer programmes to be used to:
  make decisions or determinations
  exercise powers or comply with obligations, or
  do anything else related to the above two dot points
which the Repatriation Commission can do under the VEA or legislative instruments
made under the VEA.

As with subitem (2) of items 1 and 3, subitem (2) of item 5 provides that actions
undertaken by the operation of a computer programme under subitem (1) are taken to
be actions of the Repatriation Commission.

As with subitem (3) of items 1 and 3, subitem (3) of item 5 would enable the
Repatriation Commission to substitute a decision made by a computer programme
(which by virtue of subitem (2) it is taken to have made) if the Repatriation
Commission is satisfied that the decision is incorrect.

Subitem (4) of item 5 makes it clear that this substituted decision power does not
limit any other provision in the VEA that provides for review or reconsideration of a
decision. The substituted decision power is intended to give the Repatriation
Commission an ability to undertake own motion review for any incorrect decisions
made by the operation of a computer programme, particularly in relation to decisions
and determinations made under legislative instruments under the VEA.

Items 2 and 4 insert a definition of “Secretary” into the MRCA and the DRCA
respectively.  “Secretary” will mean the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’
Affairs. This is necessary because the new computer programme provisions refer to
“the Secretary” arranging for the use of computer programmes and there is currently
no definition of “Secretary” in either the MRCA or the DRCA.

Item 6 will prevent the Secretary from delegating his power under subitem (1) of
item 5 (arranging for the use of computer programmes to make decisions under the
9

Document 12
VEA or legislative instruments made under the VEA.)  This is appropriate because it
will ensure that the decision about whether to authorise the use of a computer
programme to make decisions is taken at the highest organisational level within the
Department.

This is not necessary with respect to items 1 and 3 because, under the MRCA and the
DRCA, the Secretary is unable to delegate any of his or her powers.  That is, there is
no provision that allows the Secretary to delegate his or her powers under those Acts,
as there is under the VEA. Any delegated powers under the MRCA and the DRCA,
are powers of the MRCC.

Any amendments to the DRCA are contingent on the enactment of the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force) Bill 2016.

10

Document 12
Schedule 2 – Disclosure of information

Overview

Items 1, 7 and 10 insert a provision into each of the MRCA, DRCA and the VEA,
respectively, that would enable the Secretary of the Department to release certain
information in certain circumstances where the Secretary certifies that it is necessary
in the public interest to do so.

Items 3 – 6 insert two information sharing provisions, and two small consequential
amendments, into the DRCA.

Background

In certain limited circumstances it may be appropriate for the Secretary of the
Department of Veterans’ Affairs to disclose information about a person that was
obtained by a delegate performing their duties under the MRCA, DRCA and the
VEA.

Examples of the circumstances in which it might be appropriate for the Secretary to
disclose information about a case or class of cases include where there is a threat to
life, health or welfare, for the enforcement of laws, in relation to proceeds of crime
orders, mistakes of fact, research and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct
investigations, misinformation in the community and provider inappropriate practices.

The Privacy Act 1988 legitimately limits the circumstances surrounding the handling
and disclosure of a person’s personal information, as set out in the Australian Privacy
Principles. The purpose of the public interest disclosure provisions is to put beyond
doubt that the Secretary may, in accordance with items 1, 7 and 10, release
information about a case or class of cases.

The information sharing provisions, and related consequential amendments, are
necessary because, with the creation of a stand-alone version of the SRCA with
application to Defence Force members, the ability of the MRCC to share claims
information about current serving members with either the Secretary of the
Department of Defence or the Chief of the Defence Force is more limited than it is
under the MRCA. These amendments will align information sharing under the
DRCA with arrangements under the MRCA.

Explanation of the items

Public interest disclosures
The public interest disclosure provisions are modelled on paragraph 208(1)(a) of the
Social Security Administration Act 1999 and would enable the Secretary to disclose
information about a particular case or class of cases where the Secretary certifies that
it is necessary in the public interest to do so. In deciding whether to make a public
interest disclosure, the Secretary must follow rules set by the Minister and there are
limits about disclosing personal information, which could result in the Secretary
committing an offence.
11

Document 12

Examples of the circumstances in which it might be appropriate for the Secretary to
disclose information about a case or class of cases include where there is a threat to
life, health or welfare, for the enforcement of laws, in relation to proceeds of crime
orders, mistakes of fact, research and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct
investigations, misinformation in the community and provider inappropriate practices.

It is expected that the “class of cases” disclosure would be particularly relevant for
research and statistical analysis purposes.

Because this is a new power, five safeguards have been incorporated to ensure that it
is exercised appropriately. They are described in further detail below but, briefly,
they are:
  the Secretary must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about
how the power is to be exercised (subitem (2) of items 1, 7 and 10)
  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the
power is to be exercised (item 11)
  the Secretary cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power (item 12)
  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary must
notify the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the
information, give the person a reasonable opportunity to make written
comments on the proposed disclosure of the information and consider any
written comments made by the person (subitem (6) of items 1, 7 and 10), and
  unless the Secretary complies with the above requirements before disclosing
personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine
of 60 penalty units (approximately $10,800) (subitem (7) of items 1, 7
and 10.)

In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and the
Repatriation Commission) manages clients’ personal information in compliance with
the Privacy Act 1988, and the Department can be required to pay compensation for
breaches of the Privacy Act 1988.  In addition, departmental staff may face sanctions
under the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct if they handle a client’s personal
information in an unauthorised manner.

Subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10 would enable the Secretary of the Department of
Veterans’ Affairs to disclose information about a particular case or class of cases to
such persons and for such purposes as the Secretary determines, if he or she certifies
that it is necessary in the public interest to do so.

Subitem (2) of items 1, 7 and 10, would oblige the Secretary, when giving a
certificate under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10, to act in accordance with any rules
that the Minister makes under subitem (3) of items 1, 7 and 10.

It is intended that, should this Bill be enacted, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs
would make rules setting out the circumstances in which the Secretary may make a
public interest disclosure under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10, before the Secretary
exercises that power.  The nature and content of those rules is likely to be similar to
12

Document 12
the Social Security (Public Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination
2015, and will set out the matters to which the Secretary must have regard in giving a
public interest certificate and the circumstances in which a public interest certificate
may be given.

Examples of the sorts of circumstances in which it is envisaged that the Secretary
might consider it necessary to make a public interest disclosure under subitem (1) of
items 1, 7 and 10, include where there is a threat to life, health or welfare, for the
enforcement of laws, in relation to proceeds of crime orders, mistakes of fact, research
and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct investigations, misinformation in the
community and provider inappropriate practices.

Subitem (3) of items 1, 7 and 10, would create an instrument-making power so that
the Minister could prescribe the rules governing the exercise of the Secretary’s power
to give certificates under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10.  These rules would be
subject to disallowance by the Parliament.

Subitem (4) of items 1, 7 and 10, is included to assist readers and provides that a
certificate given under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10 in relation to a particular case
is not a legislative instrument within the meaning of section 8 of the Legislation Act
2003.

Subitem (5) of items 1, 7 and 10, is included to assist readers and provides that a
certificate given under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10 in relation to a class of cases
is a legislative instrument within the meaning of section 8 of the Legislation Act 2003.
In accordance with the principles of the rule of law that the law is applied equally and
fairly and that it is capable of being known to everyone, it is more appropriate, with
respect to a class of cases, for the certificate to be in the form of a legislative
instrument.

Subitem (6) of items 1, 7 and 10 limits disclosure of a person’s personal information
under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10 unless the Secretary has first notified the
person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, given the
person a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed
disclosure of the information and considered any written comments made by the
person.

This is an important safeguard and affords a person about whom a public interest
disclosure may be made natural justice because they will have an opportunity to
comment on any proposed disclosure, which the Secretary must consider before
proceeding to make the disclosure.

Requiring the intended disclosure, and any comments by the affected person about the
disclosure, to be in writing will ensure that the decision making process is clearly
documented and evidenced.  What constitutes a ‘reasonable opportunity” for
comment in relation to paragraph (b) of subitem (6) of items 1, 7 and 10 will depend
on the factual circumstances of each case.

Subitem (7) of items 1, 7 and 10 would establish an offence, if the Secretary
disclosed personal information about a person under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10
13

Document 12
without first having complied with subitem (6) of items 1, 7 and 10 (the Secretary
must notify a person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information,
give the person a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed
disclosure of the information and consider any written comments made by the
person.)

The proposed penalty level is 60 penalty units which is currently $10,800 (see section
4AA of the Crimes Act 1914.) This provision is another important safeguard in
ensuring the proposed power under subitem (1) of items 1, 7 and 10 is exercised
appropriately.

Subitem (8) of items 1, 7 and 10 provides that, to avoid doubt, information disclosed
in accordance with items 1, 7 and 10 is taken, for the purposes of the Australian
Privacy Principles, to be authorised by the MRCA, DRCA and the VEA, respectively.
This provision puts it beyond doubt that personal information can be disclosed when
undertaken in accordance with items 1, 7 and 10.

Subitem (9) of items 1, 7 and 10 inserts a definition of “personal information” into
the MRCA, DRCA and the VEA, respectively. “Personal information” will have the
same meaning as in the Privacy Act 1988. This amendment is necessary because
items 1, 7 and 10 refer to “personal information” and there is currently no definition
of “personal information” in the MRCA, DRCA or the VEA.

Items 2 and 13 and subitem 8(2) are application provisions for items 1, 10 and 7
respectively.  Items 2 and 13 and subitem 8(2) provide that disclosure of information
under items 1, 10 and 7 may only occur after those provisions commence (which is a
date to be fixed by proclamation), but that the information able to be disclosed under
items 1, 10 and 7 may have been obtained before, on or after commencement of those
items.

Finally, in relation to the public interest disclosure provisions, while merits review
will not be available for decisions made by the Secretary about whether to issue a
public interest certificate or release information, judicial review will be available.

Merits review is not considered appropriate in relation to these decisions because,
once information is released, remedies available under merits review are unlikely to
be of benefit to the person concerned.  Further, in situations where the Secretary
provides information for law enforcement purposes or in relation to proceeds of
crime, these sorts of decisions are not amenable to merits review, as noted by the
Administrative Review Council in its publication, “What decisions should be subject
to merits review?”

Item 9 inserts new subsection 130(3) into the VEA to make it clear that, information
disclosed in accordance with subsection 130(2), is taken, for the purposes of the
Australian Privacy Principles, to be authorised by the VEA.

Item 11 amends paragraph 212(1)(a) of the VEA to prevent the Minister from being
able to delegate his or her power to make rules under new subsection 131A(3) of the
VEA.  This will ensure that the person making the rules and exercising the power
cannot be the same person, which is an important safeguard.
14

Document 12

It is not necessary to prohibit delegation with respect to subitems 1(3) and 7(3)
because, under the MRCA and the DRCA, the Minister cannot delegate any of his or
her powers.

Item 12 amends subsection 214(1) of the VEA to prevent the Secretary from
delegating his power under subitem (1) of item 10 (giving a certificate that it is in the
public interest to disclose information.) This is another safeguard to ensure that this
proposed new power will be exercised appropriately.

This is not necessary with respect to items 1 and 3 because, under the MRCA and the
DRCA, the Secretary is unable to delegate any of his or her powers.  That is, there is
no provision that allows the Secretary to delegate his or her powers under those Acts,
as there is under the VEA. Any delegated powers under the MRCA and the DRCA,
are powers of the MRCC.

Information sharing

Item 3 inserts new table item 2A in the table in subsection 147(2) of the DRCA.  The
table lists the provisions of the DRCA which are to be modified for the purposes of a
defence-related claim.

Table item 2A modifies section 61 of the DRCA so that, where a determination
relates to liability for an injury, disease, death or the permanent impairment of a
person who was a member of the Defence Force at the time of the determination, the
MRCC must give a copy of the notice to the Chief of the Defence Force.

This amendment is necessary because the obligation to provide claims information
about serving members to the Chief of the Defence Force under the DRCA (which is
a re-enacted version of the SRCA, modified to apply only to members of the Defence
Force and their dependants) is more limited than the equivalent provision under the
MRCA: subsection 346(2).

This amendment would align the information sharing provisions of the DRCA, to
those in the MRCA.  Importantly, it would enable the MRCC to advise the Chief of
the Defence Force of determinations relating to liability and Permanent Impairment
determinations.

Subitem 8(1) is an application provision and provides that item 3 above only applies
in relation to notices given on or after commencement of that item. Item 3 will
commence on the later of either a date fixed by proclamation or 28 days after Part 2 of
Schedule 1 to the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment
(Defence Force) Act 2016 commences.  As noted below, any amendments to the
DRCA are contingent on the enactment of the Safety, Rehabilitation and
Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force) Bill 2016.

Item 4 amends subsection 151(1) of the DRCA by omitting the words “relevant to a
defence-related claim” and substituting the words “required for the purposes of this
Act.” This amendment is designed to align information sharing under the DRCA with
section 406 of the MRCA.
15

Document 12

Under the SRCA, the words “relevant to a defence-related claim” were required to
ensure that section 151 of that Act only applied to defence-related claims. As the
DRCA will only apply to Defence Force Members and their dependants, these words
can be removed and the words, “required for the purposes of this Act,” substituted
instead.

Item 5 inserts new subsection 151A(1A) into the DRCA. The new subsection will
authorise the MRCC, or a staff member assisting the MRCC, to provide certain
information obtained in performing their duties under the DRCA to the Secretary of
the Department of Defence.  This information sharing power is modelled on
section 409 of the MRCA.

The information to be provided must relate to the following purposes:
  litigation involving an injury, disease or death of an employee, in relation to
which a claim has been made under the DRCA; or
  monitoring, or reporting on, the performance of the Defence Force in relation
to occupational health and safety; or
  monitoring the cost to the Commonwealth of injuries, diseases or deaths of
employees, in relation to which claims have been made under the DRCA.

Under section 151A of the SRCA, the Department can provide any information
obtained in performing duties under that Act to certain specified agencies as the case
requires. Currently, this is limited to agencies that administer legislation relating to
Health, Aged care, Centrelink or Medicare. This has prevented the Department from
providing claims information to the Department of Defence, outside of what is
currently prescribed by the SRCA.

This amendment would align information sharing under the DRCA with subsection
409(2) of the MRCA.  Subsection 409(2) of the MRCA states that “the Commission
(or a staff member assisting the Commission) may provide any information obtained
in the performance of his or her duties under this Act to a person or agency” for
certain specified purposes.

For Defence purposes, regulation 21 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation
Regulations 2004 states that information released under subsection 409(2) may be
used (among other reasons) in monitoring or reporting on the Defence Force’s
occupational health and safety performance or for monitoring the cost to the
Commonwealth of a service injury or a service disease.  The SRCA currently does not
have a similar provision to allow information to be disclosed that would enable the
Department of Defence to monitor occupational health and safety risk (and cost) to
the Commonwealth.

Item 6 makes a technical amendment to paragraphs 151A(2)(a) and (b) of the DRCA
as a consequence inserting new subsection 151A(1A) (by item 5.)

Any amendments to the DRCA are contingent on the enactment of the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force) Bill 2016.

16

Document 12

Schedule 3 – Technical amendments

Summary

Items 2 and 3 of Schedule 3 are technical amendments that were intended to be made
as part of the Statute Update Act 2016, but which were overlooked. The purpose of
that Act is to update provisions in Acts to take account of changes to drafting
precedents and practices.  In particular, that Act updates references to penalties
expressed as a number of dollars with penalties expressed as a number of penalty
units. Such changes enhance readability, facilitate interpretation and promote
consistency across the Commonwealth statute book.

Item 1 is also a technical amendment to amend the short title of the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988, once it is
enacted.

Background

Current Commonwealth drafting practice is to express penalties for criminal offences
as a number of penalty units. The current value of a penalty unit is $180 (see section
4AA of the Crimes Act 1914). However, many older Commonwealth Acts contain
references to penalties that are expressed as an amount in dollars. Section 4AB of the
Crimes Act 1914 has the effect that if a provision refers to a penalty in dollars, this is
converted into a reference to a penalty of a certain number of penalty units (by
dividing the number of dollars by 100, and rounding up to the next whole number if
necessary), which leads to a higher penalty than is stated in the provision.

Converting references to dollar penalties under section 4AB of the Crimes Act 1914 is
time consuming for the community and the appearance of dollar amounts on the face
of the statute book that are less than the actual legal penalty can be misleading.

Consistent with the intent of the Statute Update Act 2016, the items in this Schedule
convert existing references in the VEA to penalties expressed as a number of dollars
into references to penalties expressed as a number of penalty units to remove the need
to convert the amounts and reduce the potential for confusion.

Explanation of the items

Item 2 amends the penalty for the offence under subsection 127(4) of the VEA
(failure to comply with a notice served by the Secretary) from “$1,000 or
imprisonment for 6 months” to “Imprisonment for 6 months or 10 penalty units.”
This means that, consistent with section 4AB of the Crimes Act 1914, the monetary
fine for this offence is currently $1,800 instead of $1,000.

17

Document 12
Item 3 amends section 216 of the VEA so that, instead of the maximum penalty level
for contraventions of the regulations being $500, it will be 5 penalty units (ie,
currently $900.)

Item 1 would amend the short title of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation
(Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA), once it is enacted. When the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force) Bill 2016
was introduced into the Parliament, it amended the long title of the DRCA, but not the
short title. This amendment rectifies that situation and ensures that the short title of
the DRCA is consistent with the long title.

18

Document 12

Document 12
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
PROOF
BILLS
Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment
(Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016
Second Reading
SPEECH
Thursday, 24 November 2016
BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, 24 November 2016
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Document 12
9
SPEECH
Date Thursday, 24 November 2016
Source House
Page 9
Proof Yes
Questioner
Responder
Speaker Tehan, Dan, MP
Question No.
Mr TEHAN (Wannon—Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Centenary
of  ANZAC,  Minister  Assisting  the  Prime  Minister  for  Cyber  Security  and  Minister  for  Defence  Personnel)
(10:09): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Introduction
I am pleased to present a bill which will make the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) digitally ready in a
legal sense, in line with the government's broad digital transformation agenda.
DVA is undertaking veteran-centric reform to significantly improve services for veterans and their families by
re-engineering DVA business processes.
In  anticipation  of  planned  business  and  ICT  reforms  that  will  reduce  claims  processing  times  and  automate
and streamline existing processes, amendment is required to provide a sound legislative basis for computerised
decision-making.
This  bill  also  proposes  some  amendments  to  information-sharing  provisions,  as  well  as  making  two  minor
technical amendments to the Veterans' Entitlements Act that were intended to be made as part of the Statute
Update Act 2016, but which were overlooked.
Computerised decision-making (s chedule 1)
In  the  context  of  veteran-centric  reform,  these  provisions  would  enable  the  secretary  of  DVA  to  arrange  for
computer programs to:
make decisions and determinations,
exercise powers or comply with obligations, or
do  anything  else  related  to  making  decisions  and  determinations,  or  exercising  powers  or  complying  with
obligations.
The last point is very important with respect to automating parts of DVA's business and improving outcomes for
clients. For example, where a particular provision requires notice of a decision to be given, this new computerised
decision-making provision will enable the computer program to both make the decision and send the notice.
The proposed computerised decision-making provisions are modelled on section 87 of the Australian National
Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011.
Information sharing (schedule 2)
Schedule 2 contains two types of information-sharing provisions:
1. public interest disclosures, and
2.  information  sharing  under  the  Safety,  Rehabilitation  and  Compensation  Legislation  Amendment  (Defence
Force) Act 1988, subject to it being enacted.
Public interest disclosure
CHAMBER

Thursday, 24 November 2016
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Document 12
10
In relation to the proposed public interest disclosure provision, this would enable the secretary of DVA to disclose
information about a particular case or class of cases where the secretary certifies that it is necessary in the public
interest to do so.
The Privacy Act 1988 legitimately limits the circumstances surrounding the handling and disclosure of a person's
personal information, as set out in the Australian Privacy Principles. The purpose of the public interest disclosure
provision is to put beyond doubt that the secretary may, in certain limited circumstances, release information
about a case or class of cases.
The  public  interest  disclosure  provisions  are  modelled  on  paragraph  208(1)(a)  of  the  Social  Security
Administration  Act  1999,  which  have  been  operating  for  the  last  16  years.  These  are  powers  that  have  been
available to the minister for human services since 1999 and have proven to work well.
In  deciding  whether  to  make  a  public  interest  disclosure,  the  secretary  of  DVA  must  follow  rules  set  by  the
Minister for Veterans' Affairs and there are limits about disclosing personal information, which could result in
the secretary committing an offence. These ministerial rules will be modelled on the rules currently in place for
the Department of Human Services. I have begun consulting with the shadow minister on how they can best
apply to the Department of Veterans' Affairs and I thank her for her cooperation in that regard.
Examples of the circumstances in which it might be appropriate for the secretary of DVA to disclose information
about a case or class of cases include where there is a threat to life, health or welfare, for the enforcement of laws,
in relation to proceeds of crime orders, mistakes of fact, research and statistical analysis, APS code of conduct
investigations, misinformation in the community and provider inappropriate practices.
Because this is the first time this department has been given these powers, five safeguards have been incorporated
to ensure that they are exercised appropriately. They are that:
the Minister for Veterans' Affairs sets the rules for how the secretary exercises the powers
only the Minister for Veterans' Affairs can set these rules
only the secretary can exercise the powers
before disclosing any information, the secretary must notify the person in writing, give the person a reasonable
opportunity  to  make  written  comments  on  the  proposed  disclosure,  and  the  secretary  must  consider  these
comments, and
if the secretary fails to comply with the requirements I before disclosing personal information, they will commit
an offence that is punishable by a fine of 60 penalty units.
Information sharing between the Department of Veterans' Affairs and the Department of Defence
The information-sharing provisions under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment
(Defence  Force)  Act  1988,  subject  to  it  being  enacted,  are  necessary  to  overcome  an  anomaly  that  currently
exists  between  the  Military  Rehabilitation  and  Compensation  Act  2004  and  the  Safety,  Rehabilitation  and
Compensation Act 1988.
The anomaly is that the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission is unable to provide the same sort
of information to the Secretary of the Department of Defence or the Chief of the Defence Force under the Safety,
Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 about current serving members as it is able to under the Military
Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004.
It  is  important  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Department  of  Defence  and  the  Chief  of  the  Defence  Force  are  able
to  receive  the  same  sort  of  information  about  all  serving  members,  particularly  in  the  context  of  monitoring
occupational health and safety or for monitoring the cost to the Commonwealth of a service injury or a service
disease.
The amendments would achieve this by aligning information-sharing provisions under the Safety, Rehabilitation
and Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force) Act 1988 with those in the Military Rehabilitation
and Compensation Act 2004.
CHAMBER

Thursday, 24 November 2016
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Document 12
11
Technical amendments ( s chedule 3)
The purpose of the Statute Update Act 2016 is to update provisions in acts to take account of changes to drafting
precedents and practices. In particular, that act updates references to penalties expressed as a number of dollars
with penalties expressed as a number of penalty units. Such changes enhance readability, facilitate interpretation
and promote consistency across the Commonwealth statute book.
The two technical amendments replace references to specific dollar amounts in penalties under the Veterans'
Entitlements Act with references to penalty units, which is the current Commonwealth drafting practice. There
are no substantive changes to the law—this is a technical amendment only.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I am very pleased to be introducing this bill, which provides an important plank for the foundation
of veteran-centric reform in the Department of Veterans' Affairs. I commend this bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
CHAMBER

Document 13
From:
Foreman, Lisa
To:
Orme, Craig
Cc:
Spiers, Carolyn; Cairns, Louise
Subject:
FW: ESORT comments on DR Bill [DLM=Sensitive]
Date:
Thursday, 9 February 2017 4:11:58 PM
Attachments:
img-208145701-0001.pdf
ESORT comments on DR Bill.docx
ESORT comments on DR Bill (V2).docx
Craig
Carolyn, Louise and I met today to compare notes on where we think the ESORT members landed.  I have
attached a marked up version of the document (see the ESORT Comments on DR Bill (V2) document.  In
particular, we struggled to recall (s 47F)
views - we didn't seem to capture any comments from her
that indicated her view.
For your consideration and forwarding to Simon.
Regards
Lisa
Lisa Foreman
First Assistant Secretary | Rehabilitation & Support | Department of Veterans' Affairs
(s 22)
Executive Assistant - Leanne Brozic (s 22)
-----Original Message-----
From: Whyte, Angela
Sent: Wednesday, 8 February 2017 3:36 PM
To: Orme, Craig (s 22)
; Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
Cc: Cairns, Louise (s 22)
Subject: FW: ESORT comments on DR Bill [DLM=Sensitive]
Good afternoon Craig / Lisa,
The Secretary has requested an update on the current status in regards to the DR Bill please (see attached PDF)
Angela Whyte
________________________________________
From: Spiers, Carolyn
Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2017 9:18 AM
To: Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
; Bayles, Neil (s 22)
Subject: ESORT comments on DR Bill [DLM=Sensitive]
Lisa/ Neil
I've tried to summarise comments by ESORT members on the DR Bill.  - Lisa this is an update to yesterday's
version.  Can you consider any additions to this summary.
Regards
Carolyn

Document 13
(s 47E) , (s 47C)
Mr Allan Thomas JP
Australian Peacekeepers &
Peacemakers Veterans’
Association
Mr Peter Fitzpatrick AM JP
National President Australian

Special Air Service
Association (ASASA)
National Chairman
Ms Robyn Ritchie
Defence Families Australia
(Colonel David Jamison AM
National Convenor Defence
(Ret'd))
Force Welfare Association

(DFWA)
Substitute Kerry Mellor
Mr Tony Ralph OAM
National President Legacy
Australia Inc.

(s 47F)

National Chairman Naval
Association of Australia

Mrs Narelle Bromhead OAM
National President Partners of
Veterans Association (PVA)
Air Vice-Marshal Brent
National President Royal
Espeland AM (Ret'd)
Australian Air Force

Association (RAAF)
Mr Michael von Berg MC
National President Royal
OAM
Australian Regiment

Corporation (RAR)
Robert Dick AM RFD
Chairman Returned &
Services League of Australia
(RSL)
Ms Pat McCabe OAM
National President TPI
Federation Australia
Mr Kenneth Foster OAM JP
National President Vietnam

Veterans Association of
Australia (VVAA) National
President

Document 13
(s 47E) , (s 47C)
Mr James Wain
Vietnam Veterans’
Federation of Australia
(VVFA) National President
Ms Meg Green
War Widows’ Guild of
Australia
National President

Document 13
(s 47E) , (s 47C)
Mr Allan Thomas JP
Australian Peacekeepers &
Peacemakers Veteranns’
Associationn
Mr Peter Fitzpatrick AM JP
National President Australian

Special Air Service
Association (ASASA)
National Chairman
Ms Robyn Ritchie
Defence Families Australia
(Colonel David Jamison AM
National Convenor Defence
(Ret'd))
Force Welfare Association

(DFWA)
Substitute (s 47F)

Mr Tony Ralph OAM
National President Legacy
Australia Inc.

(s 47F)

National Chairman Naval
Association of Australia

Mrs Narelle Bromhead OAM
National President Partners of
Veterans Association (PVA)

Document 13
(s 47E) , (s 47C)
Air Vice-Marshal Brent
National President Royal
Espeland AM (Ret'd)
Australian Air Force

Association (RAAF)
Mr Michael von Berg MC
National President Royal
OAM
Australian Regiment

Corporation (RAR)
Robert Dick AM RFD
Chairman Returned &
Services League of Australia
(RSL)
Ms Pat McCabe OAM
National President TPI
Federation Australia
Mr Kenneth Foster OAM JP
National President Vietnam

Veterans Association of
Australia (VVAA) National
President
Mr James Wain
Vietnam Veterans’
Federation of Australia
(VVFA) National President
Ms Meg Green
War Widows’ Guild of
Australia
National President

From:
Cairns, Louise
To:
Harris, John (D. Tehan, MP)
Cc:
Spiers, Carolyn
Subject:
ESORT meetings on DR Bill [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Hi John,
Carolyn asked me to email you the dates that we consulted with ESORT on the Digital Readiness
Bill. They are:
· 24 November 2016 – Working Group of ESORT (sub-group of 5 – 6 ESORT members; this
was in the afternoon after the DR Bill was introduced)
· 2 and 16 December 2016 – All ESORT members invited
· 1 February 2017 – ESORT workshop
· 3 March 2017 – update on the Bill
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Regards,
Louise.

Document 15
From:
Howard  Melanie
To:
ESO.Round.Table
Subject:
RE: ESORT Minutes - Digital Readiness - 1 February 2017 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Friday, 17 February 2017 11:13:52 AM
Attachments:
IPS - ESORT February 2017 Final.pptx
Summary of DVA submission to Senate Inquiry.docx
Good morning ESORT Members,
Apologies, the attached documents should have been with the original email.
The following link can be used to access submissions received by the Senate enquiry.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/VetAffairsDigitalBill/Submissions
Kind regards,
Melanie Howard
Secretariat Support Officer
Commissions, Committees and Appointments
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
(:
| *
(s 22)
(s 22)
From: Howard, Melanie On Behalf Of ESO.Round.Table
Sent: Friday, 17 February 2017 10:55 AM
To: ESO.Round.Table
Subject: ESORT Minutes - Digital Readiness - 1 February 2017 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Good morning ESORT Members,
Please see attached documentation relating to the 1st February Digital Readiness meeting.
Kind regards,
Melanie Howard
Secretariat Support Officer
Commissions, Committees and Appointments
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
(:
| *
(s 22)
(s 22)

(s 22)

Document 15
Summary of DVA’s submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Digital Readiness Bil
(s 22)
Public Interest Disclosures
DVA has a duty of care in providing its services to veterans and clients. However, often there are privacy
and legislative restraints on providing information that might be necessary in fulfilling that duty of care. In
instances of preventing harm to others or self-harm, addressing concerns about a veteran’s health,
maintaining the integrity of programmes, and ensuring appropriate service provision by providers, the
Department is not able in some instances to provide timely information to prevent detrimental outcomes
to veterans.
Public Interest Disclosures are currently used in other areas of government in a careful and judicious
manner that al ows these issues to be addressed. It is important that measures that are in place and
working in other areas of government are afforded to DVA in order to fulfil its duty of care to veterans and
clients and provide the best outcome for them.

Document 15
In recognition that DVA has not previously had this public interest disclosure power, and that disclosure of
a person’s information is not to be undertaken lightly, five specific safeguards are built into the proposed
provisions, in addition to general safeguards already available.

The specific safeguards include:
•  the Secretary of DVA must act in accordance with rules that the Minister makes about how the
power is to be exercised and the rules will be a disallowable instrument
•  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the power is to be
exercised by the Secretary of DVA
•  the Secretary of DVA cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power
•  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary of DVA must notify the
person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the information, give the person a
reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the proposed disclosure of the
information and consider any written comments made by the person (natural justice
requirements), and
•  unless the Secretary of DVA complies with the above natural justice requirements before
disclosing personal information, he or she will commit an offence, punishable by a fine of 60
penalty units (approximately $10,800.)

In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and the Repatriation
Commission) manages clients’ personal information in compliance with the Privacy Act 1988, and the
Department can be required to pay compensation for breaches of the Privacy Act 1988. In addition,
departmental staff may face sanctions under the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct if they handle a
client’s personal information in an unauthorised manner.  If a person is dissatisfied with the Secretary’s
decision to disclose information about them, they can apply for judicial review under the Administrative
Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977.
(s 22)

Document 16
From:
McKay, Grant on behalf of ESO.Round.Table
To:
ESO.Round.Table
Subject:
RE: ESORT Working Group - 1 Feb 2017 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date:
Monday, 23 January 2017 4:11:33 PM
Dear ESORT members,
During our previous meeting in December, DVA mentioned that we expected to have completed
our submission to the Senate Committee reviewing the Bill by today. We are currently still
working on the submission and now plan to lodge it with the Committee on Wednesday, 25
January. We will provide you with a copy once we have lodged it with the Committee.
Regards
Lisa
Lisa Foreman
First Assistant Secretary | Rehabilitation & Support | Department of Veterans' Affairs
(s 22)
Executive Assistant – Leanne Brozic (s 22)
From: McKay, Grant On Behalf Of ESO.Round.Table
Sent: Tuesday, 10 January 2017 3:18 PM
To: ESO.Round.Table
Subject: ESORT Working Group - 1 Feb 2017 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Good afternoon ESORT Members,
On 16 December 2016, the Round Table met to discuss the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016 (Digital Readiness Bill).
At the meeting, Lisa Foreman suggested that a follow-up workshop be held in early 2017 to talk
more about the Bill, especially the provisions regarding the use of computer programmes to
make decisions and determinations.
You are invited to attend this workshop, which will held on 1 February 2017 in DVA’s Australia-
wide videoconferencing facilities. It is scheduled for 1:00pm to 3:00pm AEDT.
The Bill is currently the subject of an inquiry by the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade
Committee. Submissions to the inquiry are due by 25 January 2017. We intend to provide you
with a copy of the Department’s submission on or around 23 January 2017.
If you could please confirm your availability, or nominate a suitable proxy, for the meeting. In
addition, if you could please respond to the ESORT Secretariat to confirm which DVA video
conference you will be using. We have initially booked the closest DVA video conference to your
place of residence.
Regards,
Grant McKay
Assistant Director
Commissions, Committees and Appointments
Department of Veterans' Affairs
(s 22)

Document 17
(s 22)
From: Cairns, Louise
Sent: Friday, 20 January 2017 11:34 AM
To: Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)
; Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
Subject: Issues to discuss at Mon 23/01 3pm meeting re DR Bill and ESORT workshop [DLM=For-
Official-Use-Only]
Dear Carolyn and Lisa,
Ahead of our meeting on Monday afternoon (3pm) to discuss the 1 February ESORT workshop, I
thought it might be useful to compile a list of issues for discussion and action needed ahead of
the meeting:
1. Format of meeting? Will we have any guest presenters, eg, from the Transformation
Taskforce?
2. Are there any specific issues we want to address (could draw from submissions to the
Senate inquiry. So far, only (s 47E)
submission has been put on the website)
3. Provide an opportunity to discuss DVA’s submission?
4. Q&A session?
5. I understand from the 16 December meeting that DVA undertook to consider suggestions
put forward by ESORT. I’ve listed these below under the heading, “Issues for
consideration.”
(s 22)
Issues for consideration
Public Interest Disclosure
· Can we provide ESORT members with a copy of the rules (s 47C) , (s 47E)
(We
provided a copy of the DSS/DHS rules following first meeting.)
· (s 47C) , (s 47E)

Document 17
· (s 47C) , (s 47E)

·
e
·
(s 22)
Concerns raised by ESORT members (for MO)
Public Interest Disclosure
(s 47C) , (s 47E)
(s 22)

Document 17
(s 22)
Louise.

Document 18
From:
Spiers, Carolyn
To:
Cairns, Louise
Cc:
Dixon, Julie
Subject:
RE: Meeting with Commonwealth Ombudsman [DLM=Sensitive]
Date:
Tuesday, 28 February 2017 10:30:38 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
No I take this to mean that when we’re writing a policy/procedure to underpin the PID we work
with the O’s office . – Lisa and I had already agreed to this approach.
Regards
CS
From: Cairns, Louise
Sent: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 10:13 AM
To: Spiers, Carolyn
Cc: Dixon, Julie
Subject: RE: Meeting with Commonwealth Ombudsman [DLM=Sensitive]
Hi Carolyn,
Does this mean that we need to consult with the Cth Ombudsman further about rule 5?
Louise.
From: Spiers, Carolyn
Sent: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 10:10 AM
To: 'Harris, John (D. Tehan, MP)' (s 22)
Cc: Cairns, Louise (s 22)
; Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
Brown, Luke (s 22)
Subject: FW: Meeting with Commonwealth Ombudsman [DLM=Sensitive]
John
Attached for your information is the comment from the Office of the Commonwealth
Ombudsman regarding our consultation with the office on DR Bill and PID rules
Regards
Carolyn
From: Emily Wilson-Kwong (s 22)
On Behalf Of
Doris Gibb
Sent: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 7:57 AM
To: Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)
; Foreman, Lisa (s 22)
Cc: Kate Wandmaker (s 22)
Subject: Meeting with Commonwealth Ombudsman [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Dear Lisa and Carolyn
Thank you for meeting with us on Friday and going through the draft Rules to underpin the
proposed amendments to the MRCA and related Acts.
As discussed, the concern for this Office in relation to the proposed amendments is that many
members of the veteran community are extremely vulnerable and have provided very personal
information to DVA. This office is concerned that, under the proposed amendments, personal
information could be released to the public at large.
Now that we have seen the proposed rules, we are pleased to note that they contain a number
of safeguards and we think the addition suggested by OAIC to Rule 6 is also an improvement
(currently the 2nd (a) but I assume will be (c) in the final version).
The main area of interest for this office is in relation to the policy which underpins proposed Rule
5, the matters to which the Secretary must have regard. We would be happy to provide input as
that policy is developed and we would then be in a position to appropriately respond to any

Document 18
complaints which may be made to this office in the future.
Thank you again for consulting this office.
Regards
Doris Gibb
Acting Deputy Ombudsman
Sent by
Emily Wilson-Kwong
Executive Assistant to
Doris Gibb, Acting Deputy Ombudsman
COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN
(s 22)
Website: ombudsman.gov.au
Influencing systemic improvement in public administration
The Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman acknowledges the traditional owners of
country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, culture and
community. We pay our respects to elders past and present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN - IMPORTANT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail message or an attachment to it is confidential, and it is intended to be accessed
only by the person or entity to which it is addressed.
No use, copying or disclosure (including by further transmission) of this message, an
attachment or the content of either is permitted and any use, copying or disclosure may be
subject to legal sanctions. This message may contain information which is:
* about an identifiable individual;
* subject to client legal privilege or other privilege; or
* subject to a statutory or other requirement of confidentiality.
If you have received this message in error, please call 1300 362 072 to inform the sender
so that future errors can be avoided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Document 19
From:
Brenton Attard
To:
Spiers, Carolyn
Cc:
Foreman, Lisa; Cairns, Louise
Subject:
RE: New section 6 - Draft PID rules [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Thursday, 23 February 2017 7:07:23 PM
Hi Carolyn
Thank you for forwarding this information on.
Confirming that it is with the meeting attendees.
Regards,
Brenton
From: Spiers, Carolyn (s 22)

Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2017 4:32 PM
To: Brenton Attard
Cc: Foreman, Lisa ; Cairns, Louise
Subject: New section 6 - Draft PID rules [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Dear Brenton
At today’s telephone meeting with the Privacy Commissioner and others, DVA agreed to redraft
a provision of the draft PID rules to be more specific on the use of de-identified data.
The following is a replacement section 6. Could you provide to Commissioner Pilgram and the
others in attendance at the meeting.
Regards
Carolyn Spiers
(s 47C), (s 47E)

Document 19
(s 47E)
IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go to
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
***********************************************************************
WARNING: The information contained in this email may be confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, any use or copying of any part
of this information is unauthorised. If you have received this email in
error, we apologise for any inconvenience and request that you notify
the sender immediately and delete all copies of this email, together
with any attachments.
***********************************************************************

Document 20

Digital Readiness Bill

(s 47C) , (s 47E)
Page 3 of 5

(s 47C) , (s 47E)

Document 21
From:
Angelene Falk
To:
Sophie Higgins
Subject:
FW: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans" Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other
Measures) Bill 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Tuesday, 21 February 2017 1:15:43 PM
Importance:
High
We will need to discuss later please.

From: Brenton Attard
Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2017 11:49 AM
To: Timothy Pilgrim (s 22)
; Angelene Falk (s 22)
Cc: Emma Jelenic (s 22)
Subject: FW: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital
Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Importance: High

Hi Timothy and Angelene

Please see meeting request from DVA below.

Emma – FYI, we may need to adjust the diary to accommodate.

Thanks

Brenton

From: Egan, Kristy (s 22)

Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2017 11:15 AM
To: Brenton Attard (s 22)
Subject: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness
and Other Measures) Bill 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Importance: High

Hi Brenton

Thank you for your time on the phone earlier. As I noted on the phone, the Senate Foreign
Affairs, Defence and Trade committee handed down its report on the Veterans’ Affairs
Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016 (‘Digital Readiness Bill’)
yesterday afternoon.

Recommendation 1 of that report at paragraph 2.74 provides:
‘The committee recommends that the Department of Veterans’ Affairs consult with the
Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Office of the Australian Information Commission
on the content of the Minister’s regulations before they are finalised and introduced in
the Parliament’.

DVA is keen to consult with the OAIC and the Ombudsman’s Office as soon as possible,
preferably this week. The senior executive from DVA that would attend the consultation are:

Document 21
·    Lisa Foreman, First Assistant Secretary, Rehabilitation and Support Division
·    Carolyn Spiers, Principal Legal Advisor, Legal Services and Assurance Branch.

Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers would bring the draft Public Interest Disclosure rules referred to in
the recommendation to the consultation and explain their operation.

Both Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers would be available all day this Thursday 23 February for the
consultation, if this is suitable for the relevant OAIC staff.  It would be anticipated that the
consultation would need to go for approximately one hour.

While Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers are able to travel to Sydney, if required, the preference would
be for the consultation to occur in Canberra.  The benefit of a meeting in Canberra would be that
we would try to arrange a joint consultation with the Ombudsman’s Office, which would allow
the relevant OAIC officers to have the benefit of hearing the comments from the relevant
Ombudsman’s Office staff on the Public Interest Disclosure rules.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any further questions.

Thank you in advance for your assistance in arranging this consultation.

Kind regards

Kristy Egan
Director
Deregulation, Assurance and Legal Administration Support (DALAS)
Legal Services, Assurance & Deregulation Branch
Department of Veterans’ Affairs | www.dva.gov.au
(s 22)

IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications and DVA
does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) please go
to
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.

Document 22
From:
Brenton Attard
To:
Angelene Falk
Subject:
Fwd: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans" Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other
Measures) Bill 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Date:
Wednesday, 22 February 2017 10:39:13 AM
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Egan, Kristy" (s 22)
Date: 21 February 2017 at 4:51:19 pm AEDT
To: (s 22)
Subject: RE: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans' Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Hi Brenton

Thank you for your call earlier, noting that there is availability for consultation on
Thursday 23 February between 12:00pm and 1:00pm. I would like to lock in that
time for the consultation. Carolyn Spiers and Lisa Foreman from DVA will be
travelling to Sydney to participate in the consultation.

I have made enquiries regarding being able to either provide a copy of the draft
rules prior to the meeting or leaving a copy after the meeting, and will get back to
you on that point.

If you could advise the address for your office and also a contact person and
number for when Ms Spiers and Ms Foreman arrive at your office that would be
greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your prompt assistance in arranging this meeting.

Kind regards

Kristy Egan
Director
Deregulation, Assurance and Legal Administration Support (DALAS)
Legal Services, Assurance & Deregulation Branch
Department of Veterans’ Affairs | www.dva.gov.au
(s 22)

From: Egan, Kristy
Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2017 11:15 AM
To: (s 22)
Subject: Consultant with OAIC on Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital

Document 22
Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016 [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
Importance: High

Hi Brenton

Thank you for your  time on the phone earlier.   As I noted on the phone, the
Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade committee handed down its report on
the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other
Measures) Bill 2016 (‘Digital Readiness Bill’) yesterday afternoon.

Recommendation 1 of that report at paragraph 2.74 provides:
‘The committee recommends that the Department of Veterans’ Affairs
consult with the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Office of the
Australian Information Commission on the content of the Minister’s
regulations before they are finalised and introduced in the Parliament’.

DVA is keen to consult with the OAIC and the Ombudsman’s Office as soon as
possible, preferably this week.  The senior executive from DVA that would attend
the consultation are:
·    Lisa Foreman, First Assistant Secretary,
Rehabilitation and Support Division
·    Carolyn Spiers, Principal Legal Advisor,
Legal Services and Assurance Branch.

Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers would bring the draft Public Interest Disclosure rules
referred to in the recommendation to the consultation and explain their operation.

Both Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers would be available all day this Thursday 23
February for the consultation, if this is suitable for the relevant OAIC staff.  It would
be anticipated that the consultation would need to go for approximately one hour.

While Ms Foreman and Ms Spiers are able to travel to Sydney, if required, the
preference would be for the consultation to occur in Canberra.  The benefit of a
meeting in Canberra would be that we would try to arrange a joint consultation
with the Ombudsman’s Office, which would allow the relevant OAIC officers to
have the benefit of hearing the comments from the relevant Ombudsman’s Office
staff on the Public Interest Disclosure rules.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any further questions.

Thank you in advance for your assistance in arranging this consultation.

Kind regards

Kristy Egan
Director
Deregulation, Assurance and Legal Administration Support (DALAS)
Legal Services, Assurance & Deregulation Branch
Department of Veterans’ Affairs | www.dva.gov.au

Document 22
(s 22)

IMPORTANT
1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information
for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated.
4. Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous
publications and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial
electronic messages.
5. To unsubscribe from emails from the Department of Veterans' Affairs
(DVA) please go to
http://www.dva.gov.au/contact_us/Pages/feedback.aspx
, and advise which mailing list you would like to unsubscribe from.
6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.

Attachments:
Covering Letter to Senate Enquiry.pdf; DR Bill Senate inquiry submission - v1.docx;
Minister-s letter to the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee- dated 12 December
2016.pdf; Table comparing proposed DRCA information sharing powers with
existing M....docx
From: Howard, Melanie On Behalf Of ESO.Round.Table
Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2017 5:35 PM
Cc: Foreman, Lisa (s 22)

Subject: FW: Departmental Submission ‐ Senate Inquiry Digital Readiness Bill [DLM=For‐Official‐Use‐Only]

Dear ESORT members

As previously advised, attached is a copy of the Department's submission to the Senate Inquiry regarding the Digital
Readiness Bill. I trust that it will assist in explaining the importance of the measures included in the Bill and will
assist with the workshop on this Bill scheduled for Wednesday 1 February.

Regards

Lisa Foreman
First Assistant Secretary
Rehabilitation and Support Division

1

1

Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee inquiry into
the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Digital Readiness and
Other Measures) Bill 2016

Submission provided by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs

Computerised decision making
The Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) is currently looking for several ways to leverage
available technology to provide a better service to veterans and clients.  Computerised
decision-making would enable some elements of the Repatriation Commission’s and
Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission’s decision-making processes to be
conducted by computer processes rather than by delegates.  Automating these processes
will free up resources and result in benefits such as shorter wait times and faster payments
and services for DVA clients.

For some time, members of the veteran community have listed slow processes and long
wait times as high priorities for the Department’s attention. These provisions would address
these issues in two ways: in enabling further routine process automation in the short term
and preparing the Department for an upgrade of its ICT systems in the medium term.

The Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) is undertaking veteran-centric reform to
significantly improve services for veterans and their families by re-engineering DVA business
processes and ICT systems.

To realise the full potential of these reforms and provide veterans with the quickest and
most accurate decisions possible, it is important that, in addition to existing processes being
simplified and streamlined, some decision-making is also automated.  In anticipation of
planned business and ICT reforms to achieve this, legislative amendment is required to
provide a sound legal basis for computerised decision-making.

Younger veterans consistently inform the Department of Veterans’ Affairs that they would
like to engage with DVA electronically.  To enable such online services, the use of expert
computer systems to make formal determinations must be legislatively sanctioned to
ensure that it is compatible with the legal principles of authorised decision making.

Similarly, older veterans provide feedback to the Department on the length of time for some
reimbursement processes and transactions. The computerised decision-making powers
would enable many of these routine reimbursements to be processed faster.

The Department has seen the potential benefits that online and automated services can
bring to veterans. As part of DVA’s veteran centric reform, a model project (“Lighthouse
Project”) was developed in 2016 in conjunction with the Department of Human Services.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

2

Lighthouse initially focused on how DVA could reduce the length of time it takes to process
a claim.

The use of computer and computer-assisted decision making will not only improve the
timeliness and accuracy of decision making but it will enable staff to deal in person with
more complicated claims or clients with unique needs.

Claims under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) were
examined. Changes to DVA’s policies and processes, combined with an easy to access online
service and an automated decision process, aim to ideally reduce the average time taken to
process a MRCA claim from about 120 days, to some claims being processed in significantly
less time, by expediting information gathering about the link between service and a
condition.  As mentioned, these provisions seek to extend the lessons learnt in this process
and prepare for an upgrade to the Department’s ICT systems.

Examples of the sorts of decisions that could be suitable for computerised decision-making
include where the decision-making can be converted into an algorithm, automatic granting
of benefits in certain circumstances and where the decision can be generated based on
information that is not subject to interpretation or discretion.

For example, travel reimbursement decisions are currently calculated by a delegate on the
basis of the mode of transport and the number of kilometres travelled at a particular rate of
reimbursement.  Under the proposed computerised decision-making provisions, a computer
program could make the calculation and decision, and issue the reimbursement and advice
about the decision. In addition, it could provide the capacity for the Department to allow
clients to submit these claims online and have the reimbursement transferred outside of
normal office hours, in a shorter time frame, and allow the client to have access to online
tracking of reimbursement requests.

There are some benefits under veterans’ legislation that automatically ensue, based on the
existence of a certain set of circumstances.  For example, where a veteran with 80 or more
impairment points dies, DVA accepts the death as “service related” for both the dependent
partner pension and payments to the children. In this instance, the Department’s process
for claims and payments could be automated to reduce the need for these partners and
dependants to contact the Department and allow a streamlined provision of their
entitlements and immediate access to funds.

Computerised decision-making could also be used to automatically extend incapacity
payments where a person is on the correct payment amount, and it is just their medical
certificate or the period of the payment that is being updated. Currently, to have incapacity
payments extended in these circumstances, a veteran has to provide their medical
certificate and a delegate scans it to the file and updates the new payment date in DVA’s
system.  This process could be simplified and streamlined for the person if they were able to
tick a few boxes online and a computer program automatically generated a decision to
extend the veteran’s incapacity payments.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

3

The Department may also be able to automate some decisions on the basis of information
supplied by the Department of Defence.  For example, currently a veteran has to provide
information on their service that is corroborated by information provided by the
Department of Defence.  However, under an automated system information provided by
the Department of Defence could provide an early determination about whether a person
has qualifying service.  This would provide the person with certainty that, should they need
to make a claim in the future for income support payments, either because they have
retired or are unable to work, they will be eligible.  A veteran could always provide
additional information to support their claim if they choose to, they need not rely only on
information held by the Department of Defence.

Another example of this sort of information based automation is a determination about
whether a particular Statement of Principles (SoP) factor has been met.  Currently, this
requires a delegate to make a determination.  However, under the proposed computerised
decision making powers and based on information supplied by the Department of Defence
about particular types of service, a computer program could calculate automatically
whether particular SoP factor has been met.

There is evidence at the moment that some SoP factors can be met simply because an ADF
member has performed their regular duties in the ADF.  For example, lower back strain
caused by carrying a heavy pack during training. Currently, if a person submits a claim for
lower back strain injury, SoP factors are fully examined.  However, where a SoP factor can
be satisfied on the basis of a person’s ADF training, this process could be automated and
streamlined for the person, as long as there is a medical diagnosis of the condition.  As
noted above, a veteran could always provide additional information to support their claim if
they choose to, they need not rely only on information provided by the Department of
Defence.

Computerised decision making may be used in a simple element of a larger and more
complex decision that requires a human decision-maker in the final analysis, but will not be
used where fact finding and weighing of evidence is required, such as
interpretation/evaluation of medical evidence. As mentioned above, these are matters for a
human decision maker to determine based on all of the evidence provided.  An example of a
simple element of a larger and more complex decision could be a determination about
whether a particular SoP factor has been met, as described above, which then reduces the
overall time for a delegate to determine a larger decision.

In terms of the implementation and safeguards around this power, computerised
decision-making would only be implemented for a decision or determination with the direct
approval of the Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. It is the intention of the
Department that, in the short term, computerised decision-making would be gradually
implemented only in relation to those decisions and determinations suitable for electronic
decision making and where no subjectivity for a decision would play a role.  In all cases, it
would be the Secretary of DVA who would decide whether a computer program could be
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

4

used to make decisions and the Secretary would not be able to delegate that power to
anyone else in DVA.

In regards to automated debt collection, the Department does not intend this provision for
this purpose. While debt calculations are already made with the assistance of computers,
debt management and collection will remain a matter where the specific circumstances of
the individual and the value of the debt are considered in what action is taken and how it is
communicated.

The language of the provisions in the Bill that would enable computerised decision-making
under veterans’ legislation is deliberately broad.  This is for two reasons.

Firstly, it is important that the Secretary of DVA has flexibility to apply computerised
decision-making in appropriate circumstances as part of the Government’s commitment to
improve services and reduce claims processing times for veterans.

As electronic capabilities and functions continue to exponentially improve, it is difficult to
predict precisely which of the numerous decisions under veterans’ legislation might be
suitable for computerised decision-making. If the Government were to specifically list in the
legislation those decisions to which computerised decision-making could be applied, it is
likely that the legislation would need to be continuously amended as capabilities improve
and either existing, or new types of, decisions need to be added to the list.

Importantly, where the Secretary authorises the use of a computer program to make
decisions or determinations, that decision/determination made by a computer program
must comply with all of the requirements of particular legislative provisions, in the same
way that a delegate’s decision would. For example, under subsection 284(1) of the MRCA,
there are three matters about which a delegate must be satisfied before certain wholly
dependent partners are eligible for treatment.  Should the Digital Readiness Bill be enacted
and the Secretary authorises the use of a computer program to make determinations under
subsection 284(1) of the MRCA, the decision coming from the computer program would also
have to be satisfy those same three matters.

Secondly, to gain maximum benefit from computerised decision-making the enabling
powers need to permit a computer program to undertake actions related to making
decisions or determinations, exercising powers, and complying with obligations under
veterans’ affairs legislation. A practical example of this is where notice of a decision is
required to be given. Automating this process would enable the computer program to both
make the decision and send the notice, enabling faster decisions to be made and
communicated.

For example, a person could submit a travel reimbursement claim late at night for a medical
appointment that occurred earlier in the day.  Under computerised decision-making, the
computer program could make the decision, send an automatically generated email advising
the person of the outcome and deposit the reimbursement in the person’s bank account –
all outside of normal business hours and at the person’s convenience.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

5

In addition to these requirements, should a computer program malfunction or make an
incorrect decision, the Repatriation Commission or the Military Rehabilitation and
Compensation Commission (MRCC) (depending on which Act the decision/determination is
made under) can substitute that decision or determination.

In these circumstances, a veteran would not need to request a review of an incorrect
decision or determination made by a computer program because the Commissions would
be able to exercise this substitution power on “own motion.”  An “own motion” review
power enables the Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and
Compensation Commission to look at a decision or determination and consider whether it
should be varied or revoked, without a person having to formally ask either of the
Commissions to review the decision. The “own motion” review power is designed to correct
computerised decisions that are incorrect.

Importantly, the proposed “own motion” review power would be in addition to a person’s
existing statutory review rights and would not affect their right to request review of a
decision with which they are dissatisfied.

In regards to appeals of decisions more generally, if a person were dissatisfied with a
correctly made computer generated decision, they could exercise their existing statutory
rights of review under veterans’ legislation. If a veteran believes a computer has made an
incorrect decision, they would be able to contact a DVA staff member to discuss the issue.
All normal processes for appeal and recourse would be still available to the veteran.

The Department of Veterans’ Affairs is one of the few client-focused departments that does
not have the capacity for computerised decision-making. Other Commonwealth agencies
already use computer programs to make decisions and seen benefits for their clients in
terms of reduced wait times on decisions and faster processing for claims.  For example,
the:
  Department of Social Services and the Department of Human Services to make
decisions about people’s social security benefits and calculations (section 6A of the
Social Security Administration Act 1999)
  Department of Immigration in relation to citizenship applications (section 48 of the
Australian Citizenship Act 2007)
  Therapeutic Goods Administration about medicines and other therapeutic goods to
be placed on the Register (section 7C of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989)
  Clean Energy Regulator about carbon credit units and Kyoto units under the Registry
of Emissions Units  (section 87 of the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units
Act 2011), and
  Australian Fisheries Management Authority in relation to fishing permits, fishing
rights and management plans (section 163B of the Fisheries Management Act 1991)

In addition, the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2016 (the Bill), which
was introduced into the House of Representatives on 24 November 2016, seeks to insert
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

6

similar computerised decision-making powers into the National Health Act 1953 (see
Schedule 1 amendments.)

In the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill it is noted that the amendments in Part 1 of
Schedule 1 of the Bill provide that the Minister, the Secretary of the Department of Health
and the Chief Executive Medicare can arrange for a computer program to be used to take
administrative actions on their behalf including making decisions, exercising any powers or
complying with any obligations under Part VII of the National Health Act 1953 or any
legislative instruments made under that Part, or doing anything else related to those
actions.

An example of the sort of computerised decision-making envisaged under these
amendments is to streamline processes such as fully automated online processing of
PBS claims and prescribing approvals.  Use of real-time prescription data for claims
processing reduces payment times for approved pharmacists and removes the need for
hardcopy prescriptions to be submitted to the Department of Human Services for
reconciliation.  Online prescribing approvals for certain prescriptions will reduce
administrative workload for prescribers and save time for prescribers during consultations
by removing the need to request approvals for individual patients by telephone or in
writing.

The ability to automate some aspects of DVA’s business does not mean that veterans would
be left dealing with a machine rather than a person. Similarly, it will not mean that veterans
would have to have a computer in order to be able to access DVA services. Where veterans
would prefer, they will always be able to speak to a DVA staff member. The challenge for
DVA is to remain responsive to the needs of all veterans while also repositioning its services
and programmes to accommodate changes in client demographics.

DVA has a deep connection and commitment to our clients and this will continue.
Computerised decision-making, which is an aspect of the Department’s broader veteran
centric reform, is about putting the client at the centre and re-engineering DVA’s systems
and processes to revolve around clients.  The Department must continue to explore and use
new technologies to deliver a higher standard of service, which will be achieved by enabling
simple, non-subjective decisions to be made by computers. These powers are necessary to
maintain the Department as a modern functioning service provider.

Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

7

Public Interest Disclosures
The Department of Veterans’ Affairs has a duty of care in providing its services to veterans
and clients. However, often there are privacy and legislative restraints on providing
information that might be necessary in fulfilling that duty of care. In instances of preventing
harm to others or self-harm, addressing concerns for health provision, maintaining the
integrity of programmes, and preventing abuse of programmes by providers, the
Department is not able in some instances to provide timely information to prevent
detrimental outcomes to veterans.

Public Interest Disclosures are currently used in other areas of government in a careful and
judicious manner that allows these issues to be addressed. It is important that measures
that are in place and working in other areas of government are afforded to the Department
of Veterans’ Affairs in order to fulfil its duty of care to veterans and clients and provide the
best outcome for them.

In this context, the Privacy Act 1988 legitimately limits the circumstances for the handling
and disclosure of a person’s personal information, as set out in the Australian Privacy
Principles.  However, as outlined above, there are certain limited circumstances where it
would be appropriate for the Secretary of DVA to disclose information about a person
outside of the Privacy Act.

Such circumstances include where there is a threat to life, health or welfare (either to self or
to others), for enforcing laws, mistakes of fact or misinformation in the community and
provider inappropriate practices.

The purpose of the public interest disclosure provisions is to ensure that the Secretary of
the Department has an ability to release information about a particular case or class of
cases where it is appropriate to do so.

To assist the Committee to understand the circumstances in which DVA might need to
release information about a veteran, four such examples are outlined below.

Threat to life
  Where DVA considers that a client may be planning to harm either themselves or
another person, albeit at an unspecified time in the future, and where it is not
unreasonable or impracticable to obtain the person’s consent to disclose their
personal information (ie, the threat may not materialise until some weeks into the
future), DVA is unable to provide that information to the appropriate authorities
because the person’s consent could, in theory, be obtained given the time frames
involved.  Under the proposed public interest disclosure provisions, however, the
Secretary would be able to share that information if he or she considered that it
were in the public interest to do so, putting beyond doubt that such information can
be shared to ensure public safety.

Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

8

Threat to health or welfare
  Under the current system, the Department is not able to provide certain information
to a third party even where the health and welfare of a client is at risk. For example,
where a local council community advisor might become aware that a person has
significant health issues and is a DVA client, if the person chooses not to reveal the
nature of their health problems the local council advisor is unable to assist them,
ultimately to the detriment of their health. If appropriate under the proposed public
interest disclosure provision, the Department could share this form of information
with external agencies to ensure the person receives proper treatment for their
condition.

Provider inappropriate practices
  Currently, the Department is unable to advise veterans of instances of provider
abuse or inappropriate practices if it meant that the information used would reveal
circumstances of a provider contract with the Department. For example, where DVA
becomes aware that a contracted treatment provider, was inappropriately asking
DVA clients to pay more than the negotiated price to receive treatment, it might be
appropriate for DVA to advise these clients that under DVA health treatment card
arrangements eligible clients do not make co-payments.  If the Secretary of DVA
considered it to be in the public interest, however, the public interest disclosure
provisions would enable him or her to take out notices in local newspapers or similar
action to notify clients more generally.

Mistake/misinformation in the community
  The Department is aware of instances where misinformation or claims that are not
factual have damaged the integrity of programmes or prevented veterans from
taking up assistance from the Department, often leading to wider spread distress
among veterans. In these instances, the Department has not got the ability to
correct the misinformation or mistake of fact as it may include the disclosure of
information about a veteran or class of veterans. Often in these circumstances, the
misinformation or mistake of fact can often have consequences which are
detrimental to some veterans’ mental health conditions or lead to some veterans
cancelling their contact with the Department. These outcomes may have been
prevented were DVA able to provide limited information to the public regarding
circumstances where mistake of fact or misinformation has caused distress in the
veteran community.

Australian Public Service (APS) Code of Conduct investigations
  In circumstances where the Department suspects that a staff member may have
inappropriately accessed or released a client’s personal information, and would like
a third party investigation firm to undertake an investigation, there is doubt about
whether a client’s personal information (as opposed to the staff member being
investigated) could be released to the third party investigation firm under the
Australian Privacy Principles.  An investigation firm may need a client’s information
to verify whether a staff member had access to certain information about a client,
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

9

particularly where there is an allegation that information was inappropriately
released.  If the Secretary considered it in the public interest to do so, he or she
could provide this information to assist with APS Code of Conduct investigations.

The Department understands that there are concerns around the proposed power to
release information regarding individual cases or classes of cases. In particular, concern has
been raised over the provision of information to correct mistakes of fact or misinformation.
However, misinformation in the public arena about DVA policies, processes and procedures
can have a detrimental effect on veterans’ wellbeing.

When there are misconceptions and misinformation about DVA’s services or programmes,
this can lead to veterans lacking confidence in DVA and becoming unnecessarily concerned
about their cases. It may even dissuade veterans from accessing the essential services that
they require.  Misinformation in the community can also exacerbate underlying mental
health conditions for some veterans, damaging rehabilitative progress that may have been
made under DVA programmes.

Just as computerised decision-making is not new within Government, neither are public
interest disclosure provisions.  The proposed provisions are modelled on
paragraph 208(1)(a) of the Social Security Administration Act 1999. That public interest
disclosure provision has been in operation for 17 years and has operated successfully with
the approval of Parliament. The Privacy Commissioner has not raised any concern about the
Department of Social Services/Department of Human Services’ provision.  If a person is
concerned that their information has been inappropriately shared, they may lodge a
complaint with the Privacy Commissioner. There is no cost involved and a person does not
need a lawyer to represent them.

When the Minister for Social Services revoked and remade the Social Security (Public
Interest Certificate Guidelines) (DSS) Determination 2015, the Parliamentary Committee for
Human Rights conducted an inquiry and report into the guidelines and concluded that the
public interest certificate determinations are likely to be compatible with the right to
privacy.

In recognition, however, that DVA has not previously had this public interest disclosure
power, and that disclosure of a person’s information is not to be undertaken lightly, five
specific safeguards are built into these proposed provisions, in addition to general
safeguards already available.

Specific safeguards
  the Secretary of DVA must act in accordance with rules1 that the Minister makes
about how the power is to be exercised and the rules will be a disallowable
instrument

1 See below for further information about the rules.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

10

  the Minister cannot delegate his or her power to make rules about how the
power is to be exercised by the Secretary of DVA
  the Secretary of DVA cannot delegate the public interest disclosure power to
anyone else
  before disclosing personal information about a person, the Secretary of DVA
must notify the person in writing about his or her intention to disclose the
information, give the person a reasonable opportunity to make written
comments on the proposed disclosure of the information and consider any
written comments made by the person (natural justice requirements), and
  unless the Secretary of DVA complies with the above natural justice
requirements before disclosing personal information, he or she will commit an
offence, punishable by a fine of 60 penalty units (approximately $10,8002.)

General safeguards
In addition to the above safeguards, the Department (on behalf of the MRCC and the
Repatriation Commission) manages clients’ personal information in compliance with the
Privacy Act 1988, and the Department can be required to pay compensation for breaches of
the Privacy Act 1988.  In addition, departmental staff may face sanctions under the
Australian Public Service Code of Conduct if they handle a client’s personal information in an
unauthorised manner.

If a person is dissatisfied with the Secretary’s decision to disclose information about them,
they can apply for judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act
1977.  Merits review will not be available because the kinds of remedies available under
merits review are unlikely to be of benefit and also because of the time frames involved.

Where the Secretary has publically released information about a person, merits review,
which examines the correctness of the decision, is unlikely to be of benefit to the person
because their information would already be in the public arena.  The timeframe within
which information will be released will depend on the individual circumstances of each case.
However, it is very unlikely that, between becoming aware that the Secretary intends to
disclose information and the release of that information, a person would be able to obtain
merits review.

As stated in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Digital Readiness Bill, it is intended that,
should this Bill be enacted, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs would make rules setting out
the circumstances in which the Secretary of DVA may make a public interest disclosure,
before he or she exercises that power.

2 When the Digital Readiness Bill was introduced, one penalty unit was $180 under section 4AA of the
Crimes Act 1914.  However, the Government announced at the 2016-17 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook
that it intended to increase the penalty unit amount from $180 to $210, effective 1 July 2017. If that change is
approved by the Parliament, the fine will be approximately $12,600.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

11

The Department notes that the Minister is currently in consultation with the shadow
minister, the Hon Amanda Rishworth MP, to develop the precise rules that the Minister
would need to determine for the use of the Public Interest Disclosure powers.
In responding to a request for information from the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee, the
Minister advised that Committee that he intended to make rules that would appropriately
limit the circumstances in which the Secretary would be able to exercise the proposed
public interest disclosure power and that he or she would not exercise that power until the
rules are in place.  Attached is a copy of the Minister’s letter, for the information of this
Committee.
Unfortunately, the final rules/guidelines3 are not able to be provided to the Committee at
this time, primarily because they cannot be made until after the Digital Readiness Bill
receives Royal Assent, should the Parliament pass the Digital Readiness Bill. In relation to
the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA)
rules/guidelines, the DRCA also needs to have been passed by the Parliament before they
can be made.
In anticipation that the Digital Readiness Bill will be enacted, the Department is aware that
the Minister has been consulting his Parliamentary colleagues, and in particular the shadow
minister, about the content of the rules/guidelines and that he will instruct officers in DVA
about how he wants the rules/guidelines drafted.  The Parliament will have an appropriate
opportunity to consider the rules/guidelines once they are drafted, as they will be a
disallowable instrument, ensuring Parliamentary scrutiny and oversight.

Information Sharing
Timely information sharing between DVA and the Department of Defence is crucial to the
veteran experience.  It is important that the Chief of the Defence Force is aware if a
currently serving member submits an application for compensation for incapacity payments,
permanent impairment or is in receipt of medical treatment, or has claimed liability for a
condition.  The Chief of the Defence Force owes a duty of care to members, especially those
members deployed in an operational context.

Information sharing can also promote healthier work practices in the military.  For example
the MRCC may notice a common pattern of injuries arising out of certain duties.
This information should be shared appropriately so that fewer people become injured, and
fewer compensation claims are made.
Providing information at the macro level to Defence about claims can lead to improved
outcomes for both the individual member concerned, and the ADF more broadly.
For example:

3 Rules/guidelines will be made under each of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, Military Rehabilitation and
Compensation Act 2004 and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

12

  Mental health conditions – it is important that the Chief of the Defence Force knows
whether deployed members on overseas missions have any mental health
conditions, such as PTSD.  If these conditions are unknown, they could imperil the
member and their unit.  This could also provide information or a flag as to the
mental health education, tools and support the individual and their family may
require.
  Hearing loss trends in veterans – the incidence of hearing loss in current and ex-ADF
members is important occupational health and safety information as so many jobs in
the ADF require top hearing ability for personal protection, intelligibility of signals
and discerning speech against background noise.
  Treatment sought outside of Defence health arrangements – this is particularly
important for personnel on seagoing vessels, where access to certain treatment may
be limited at sea.

Providing claims information to the ADF about injuries, diseases and deaths of members will
enable the ADF to monitor the occupational health and safety of its workforce and
determine whether adjustments are needed to training or equipment, for example, to
reduce incidences of injuries.  It could also provide an opportunity for more targeted
promotion of health and wellbeing education, tools and support.
The MRCC and the Repatriation Commission are able to share the above sort of information
with the Department of Defence or the Chief of the Defence Force under the MRCA and the
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) respectively, but the MRCC is unable to share such
information under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (SRCA), and,
should the DRCA be passed by the Parliament, also would not be able to under the DRCA.
The proposed amendments would be made to the DRCA to align it with the MRCA, subject
to the DRCA being enacted.
The SRCA predominantly applies to Commonwealth public servants, with Comcare able to
share information with agencies such as the Departments of Health and Human Services, as
well as Centrelink and Medicare. However, there is not a power under the SRCA/DRCA to
share information with the Department of Defence, in the way that there is under the
MRCA, which is a military-specific compensation Act.
It is anomalous that crucial work health and safety information can only be provided on the
basis of legislative coverage.  It is appropriate that the Repatriation Commission and the
MRCC would be able to provide consistent information about members, irrespective of
whether their claim falls under the DRCA or MRCA.  For this reason, these information
sharing amendments would align the information sharing provisions in the DRCA (subject to
it being passed by the Parliament), with the existing information sharing provisions in the
MRCA.
The information would only be able to be provided to specified persons and for specified
purposes.  In relation to the Chief of the Defence Force, the amendments would enable the
MRCC to provide a copy of a determination if it related to liability for an injury, disease or
death, or the permanent impairment of a member.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

13

Under section 143 of the SRCA, the MRCC must give a copy of a defence-related claim to the
relevant service chief of the person making a claim, if the person was a member of the
Defence Force at the relevant time of the injury or accident or when the disease was
contracted.  However, there is currently no provision in the SRCA, as there is in the MRCA,
that specifically enables the MRCC to provide a copy of a determination made in relation to
a claim.  The amendment to the DRCA would create greater certainty about the MRCC’s
ability to do so.
In relation to the Secretary of the Department of Defence, the information that could be
provided must relate to one of the following purposes:
  litigation involving an injury, disease or death of an employee, in relation to which a
claim has been made under the DRCA; or
  monitoring, or reporting on, the performance of the Defence Force in relation to
occupational health and safety; or
  monitoring the cost to the Commonwealth of injuries, diseases or deaths of
employees, in relation to which claims have been made under the DRCA.

To assist in comparing the proposed DRCA information sharing provisions with the existing
MRCA ones, a table is attached to this submission for ease of reference.  While the
provisions in the table may look a little different, they achieve the same objective and were
drafted to conform to existing provisions in the SRCA/DRCA.
If a person is concerned that their information has been inappropriately shared, they may
lodge a complaint with the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC.)
There is no cost involved and the person does not need a lawyer to represent them.  If the
person is dissatisfied with a decision of the OAIC, in certain circumstances they may be able
to apply to the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court for review of a
decision. Further, the Privacy Act states that information gathered for a particular purpose
may generally only be used for that purpose.  Agencies that use information inappropriately
face sanction under the Privacy Act.

Technical Amendments
The Digital Readiness Bill contains three minor and technical amendments. Two of the
technical amendments were intended to be made as part of the Statute Update Act 2016,
but were overlooked. The purpose of that Act is to update provisions in Acts to take account
of changes to drafting precedents and practices. In particular, that Act updates references to
penalties expressed as a number of dollars with penalties expressed as a number of penalty
units. Such changes enhance readability, facilitate interpretation and promote consistency
across the Commonwealth statute book.
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

14

Current Commonwealth drafting practice is to express penalties for criminal offences as a
number of penalty units. The current value of a penalty unit is $1804 (see section 4AA of the
Crimes Act 1914). However, many older Commonwealth Acts contain references to
penalties that are expressed as an amount in dollars. Section 4AB of the Crimes Act 1914 has
the effect that if a provision refers to a penalty in dollars, this is converted into a reference
to a penalty of a certain number of penalty units (by dividing the number of dollars by 100,
and rounding up to the next whole number if necessary), which leads to a higher penalty
than is stated in the provision.
Converting references to dollar penalties under section 4AB of the Crimes Act 1914 is time
consuming for the community and the appearance of dollar amounts on the face of the
statute book that are less than the actual legal penalty can be misleading.
Consistent with the intent of the Statute Update Act 2016, these two amendments convert
existing references in the VEA to penalties expressed as a number of dollars into references
to penalties expressed as a number of penalty units to remove the need to convert the
amounts and reduce the potential for confusion.
The other technical amendment would amend the short title of the Safety, Rehabilitation
and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA), subject to it being enacted.
When the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Legislation Amendment (Defence Force)
Bill 2016 was introduced into the Parliament, it amended the long title of the DRCA, but not
the short title. This amendment would rectify that situation and ensure that the short title
of the DRCA is consistent with the long title.

Stakeholder engagement/consultation on the Digital Readiness Bill
The Department has undertaken consultation with the Ex-Service Organisation Roundtable
(ESORT) on the Digital Readiness Bill.  The ESORT is the primary forum for consulting with
the ex-service and defence communities and comprises the National Presidents of
14 Ex-Service Organisations, and members of the Repatriation Commission and the Military
Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission.

There have been several productive meetings between DVA representatives and ESORT
members to discuss the content of the Digital Readiness Bill.  Consultation with a smaller
working group of ESORT members occurred on 24 November 2016 and then full ESORT
meetings occurred on 2 and 16 December 2016.  A further workshop with ESORT members
is planned for early February 2017.  Some ESORT members have indicated that they found
those information sessions very valuable, and they thanked DVA for the briefing provided on
the Digital Readiness Bill.


4 When the Digital Readiness Bill was introduced, one penalty unit was $180 under section 4AA of the
Crimes Act 1914.  However, the Government announced at the 2016-17 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook
that it intended to increase the penalty unit amount from $180 to $210, effective 1 July 2017
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

15

The Government is actively listening to the views of stakeholders and working to allay any
concerns they may have. The Department is considering suggestions made by ESORT
members about the amendments proposed in the Digital Readiness Bill and these matters
are under active deliberation.

List of Attachments

Minister’s letter to the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee, dated
12 December 2016.

(s 22)

Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee into the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation
Amendment (Digital Readiness and Other Measures) Bill 2016

(s 22)