ONE NATIONAL CIRCUIT
BARTON
FOI
FOI/2020/211
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
REQUEST BY:
Trav S
DECISION BY:
Peter Rush
Assistant Secretary
Parliamentary and Government Branch
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Trav S
I refer to your email of 9 September 2020 in which you made a request to the Department of
the Prime Minister and Cabinet (
the Department) under the
Freedom of Information Act
1982 (the
FOI Act) in the following terms:
This a request for information under the FOI Act.
On 14 May 2020, PM&C’s Honours Department wrote to the Minister for honours
policy staff stating:
"In 2010, PM&C was approached by AusAID to consider a request (s47F name
redacted) for these contractors to be considered for the award of the Humanitarian
Overseas Service Medal. The honours team assessed the information and sought input
from relevant stakeholders in forming a view for recommendation to the Minister for
honours policy".
Regarding PM&C's statement, please provide the following documents for review:
1. the information the honours team assessed. Please don’t include the HOSM
application submitted by (s47F name redacted).
2. PM&C's correspondence seeking the input from the “relevant stakeholders”.
3. the correspondence from the “relevant stakeholders” in which they provide their
input to PM&C, and the input they provided.
Postal Address: PO Box 6500, CANBERRA ACT 2600
Telephone: +61 2 6271 5849 Fax: +61 2 6271 5776 www.pmc.gov.au ABN: 18 108 001 191
4. PM&C’s correspondence to the commercial organisation under consideration
seeking their input, and the input provided.
5. PM&C’s correspondence, occurring between April 2012 and 25 March 2013, to the
Minister responsible for honours policy regarding their recommendations to the
Minister.
In April 2012 PM&C informed AusAID they would deliver a document titled
“amendment of humanitarian overseas service medal (Iraq) declaration 2004 to
extend to specified commercial contractors” to the Parliamentary Secretary to the
Prime Minister [PSPM] Senator Jan McLucas.
Regarding that document, please provide the following for review:
6. PM&C’s correspondence to PSPM McLucas
7. PSPM McLucas's correspondence regarding the document.
8. PM&C’s correspondence to AusAID regarding the document.
On 14 May 2020, PM&C’s Honours Department wrote to the Minister for honours
policy’s staff and stated:
“( s47F name redacted ) was furnished with internal communications between
AusAID and PM&C dating from 2012. Unfortunately, this communication pre-dated
final input from stakeholders and the final Ministerial decision by the then responsible
Minister, the Hon Josh Frydenberg MP”.
Regarding PM&C's statement, please provide the following documents for review:
9. The correspondence providing the “final input from stakeholders”, and their input.
On 9 October 2020, the Department notified you of its intention to refuse your request for
practical refusal reasons under section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act. The Department’s notice
commenced a request consultation process under section 24AB of the FOI Act.
On 10 October 2020, you responded as follows:
On 14 May 2020, PM&C stated:
"In 2010, PM&C was approached by AusAID to consider a request (s47F name
redacted) for these contractors to be considered for the award of the Humanitarian
Overseas Service Medal. The honours team assessed the information and sought input
from relevant stakeholders in forming a view for recommendation to the Minister for
honours policy".
1. Please provide a copy of PM&C’s correspondence to the relevant stakeholders
seeking their input.
“(s47F name redacted) was furnished with internal communications between AusAID
and PM&C dating from 2012. Unfortunately, this communications pre-dated final
2
link to page 3 link to page 3
input from stakeholders and the final Ministerial decision by the then responsible
Minister."
2. Please provide a copy of the 'communications between AusAID and PM&C dating
from 2012'.
3. Please provide a copy of the final input.
Authorised decision-maker I am authorised to make this decision in accordance with arrangements approved by the
Department’s Secretary under section 23 of the FOI Act.
Decision
I have decided to refuse your request under section 24(1) of the FOI Act.
In making this decision, I have had regard to the following material:
• your request of 9 September 2020;
• the Department’s practical refusal consultation notice of 9 October 2020 and your
response of 9 October 2020;
• the FOI Act; and
• the ‘Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under s 93A of
the
Freedom of Information Act 1982’
1 (the
FOI Guidelines).
Reasons
Refusal of requests – diversion of resources
Section 24(1) of the FOI Act provides that if an agency is satisfied when dealing with a
request for a document that a practical refusal reason exists in relation to the request, the
agency:
• must undertake a request consultation process (see section 24AB of the FOI Act); and
• if, after the request consultation process, the agency is satisfied that the practical
refusal reason still exists – the agency may refuse to give access to the document in
accordance with the request.
Section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act provides that a practical refusal reason exists in relation
to a request for a document if the work involved in processing the request would substantially
and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
In deciding if a practical refusal reason exists, an agency must have regard to the resources
required to perform the following activities specified in section 24AA(2) of the FOI Act:
2
• identifying, locating or collating documents within the filing system of the agency;
• examining the documents;
• deciding whether to grant, refuse or defer access;
• consulting with other parties;
1 FOI Guidelines published on the web site of the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner at
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-guidelines/.
2 FOI Guidelines, [3.116].
3
link to page 4 link to page 4
• redacting exempt material from the documents;
• making copies of documents;
• notifying an interim or final decision to the applicant.
Other matters may be relevant in deciding if a practical refusal reason exists such as the
staffing resources available to an agency for FOI processing, whether the processing can only
be undertaken by one or more specialist officers in an agency who have competing
responsibilities, the impact that processing may have on other work in an agency including
FOI processing, whether an applicant has cooperated in framing a request to reduce the
processing workload, and whether there is a significant public interest in the documents
requested.
3 Section 24AB(9) of the FOI Act provides that an agency is only obliged to undertake a
request consultation process once for any particular request.
I note that the Department has undertaken one request consultation process with you, as
described above.
I consider that your revised request of 9 October 2020 has not removed the practical refusal
reason under section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act.
In my view, the practical refusal reasons expressed in the Department’s notice of
9 October 2020 also apply to your revised request of 9 October 2020, namely:
The Department has undertaken preliminary searches and to date has identified over
1700 pages that would need to be manually reviewed to identify any documents
meeting the terms of your FOI request. There may be additional locations that need to
be searched to identify documents meeting the terms of your FOI request.
Having regard to the subject-matter of your FOI request, the above estimates
concerning number of pages to be searched and pages meeting the terms of your FOI
request, and the tasks required to process your FOI request, the Department estimates
that processing will take at least 84 hours, based on a conservative estimate that
approximately 50 per cent of the documents are within the scope of your FOI request.
Ordinary hours of work for full-time employees in the Department are 38 hours per
week.4 Having regard to the estimate of time to process the request, this means it
would take one officer at least 2 weeks to process your FOI request.
The Department acknowledges that the processing of requests for access to documents
is a legitimate part of each agency’s functions, and that FOI requests may require
reallocation of resources within an agency. However, the Department could not
reasonably divert resources to assist in processing the request. In reaching this view,
the Department has had regard to the public interest in access to information held by
the Department but considers the public interest in access is outweighed by the
competing public interest in the ability of the Department to undertake its ordinary
functions without substantial impairment, including the processing of other FOI
requests.
3 Ibid, [3.117].
4 Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,
Enterprise Agreement 2017-2020, [315].
4
Therefore, for the reasons given above, I have decided to refuse your FOI request under
section 24(1) of the FOI Act.
Review rights
Information about your rights of review can be found on the website of the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner a
t https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-
information/reviews-and-complaints/.
Complaint rights
You may make a complaint to the Information Commissioner about the Department’s actions
in relation to a request. Making a complaint about the way the Department has handled an
FOI request is a separate process to seeking review of the Department’s decision. Further
information about how to make a complaint is available at
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-
of-information/reviews-and-complaints/. Yours sincerely
Peter Rush
Assistant Secretary
Parliamentary and Government Branch
12 October 2020
5
Document Outline
