PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
7 June 2021
Our reference: LEX 62246
James Polley
Only by email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx Dear Mr Polley
Decision on your Freedom of Information Request
I refer to your request to Services Australia (the agency) dated 6 May 2021, seeking access
under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act) to the following document:
Quarantine of Centrelink debts 107-20061706
My decision
The agency holds 1 document relevant to your request. I have decided to
refuse access to
the document.
I have decided the document is conditionally exempt under the FOI Act on the basis the
disclosure of the document would, or could reasonably be expected to have, a substantial
adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the agency and
release is contrary to the public interest (section 47E(d) of the FOI Act).
Please see the schedule at Attachment A to this letter for a list of the document and the
reasons for my decision, including the relevant sections of the FOI Act.
You can ask for a review of our decision
If you disagree with any part of the decision you can ask for a review. There are two ways
you can do this. You can ask for an internal review from within the department, or an external
review by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. You do not have to pay for
a review of the decision. See Attachment B for more information about how to request a
review.
Further assistance
If you have any FOI questions please email
xxx.xxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx. Yours sincerely
Reshma
Authorised FOI Decision Maker
Freedom of Information Team
Employment Law and FOI Branch | Legal Services Division
Services Australia
PAGE 1 OF 7
Attachment A
SCHEDULE OF DOCUMENT
POLLEY, James - LEX 62246
Doc
Pages
Date
Description
Decision
Exemption
Comments
No.
1.
1-6
Version
Quarantine of
Refuse (in full)
s 47E(d)
Information that would have a substantial adverse effect on
published
Centrelink debts –
the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the
14 April 2021
107-20061706
agency deleted under section 47E(d).
PAGE 2 OF 7
REASONS FOR DECISION
What you requested
On 6 May 2021, you requested:
Quarantine of Centrelink debts 107-20061706
What I took into account
In reaching my decision I took into account:
your request dated 6 May 2021
the document falling within the scope of your request
whether the release of material is in the public interest
consultations with agency officers about:
o the nature of the document,
o the agency's operating environment and functions
guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of
the FOI Act (the Guidelines), and
the FOI Act.
Reasons for my decisions
I am authorised to make decisions under section 23(1) of the FOI Act.
I have decided the document is conditionally exempt under the FOI Act. My findings of fact
and reasons for deciding the exemption applies to the document are discussed below.
Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act – operations of the agency
I have applied the conditional exemption in section 47E(d) of the FOI Act to the document.
Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act provides:
A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or could
reasonably be expected to have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and
efficient conduct of the operations of an agency.
Proper and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency
In
Re James and Australian National University (1984) 6 ALD 687 (Re James) the phrase
‘conduct of operations’ was interpreted to extend ‘to the way in which an agency discharges
or performs any of its functions.’
PAGE 3 OF 7
I am satisfied the information contained within the document is relevant to the delivery of the
agency’s compliance programmes, and therefore is relevant to the conduct of the agency’s
operations.
Could reasonably be expected to have a substantial adverse effect
Paragraph 5.20 of the Guidelines provides:
The term ‘substantial adverse effect’ broadly means ‘an adverse effect which is
sufficiently serious or significant to cause concern to a properly concerned
reasonable person’. The word ‘substantial’, taken in the context of substantial loss or
damage, has been interpreted as ‘loss or damage that is, in the circumstances, real
or of substance and not insubstantial or nominal’.
In Re James it was held the term “substantial adverse effect” meant the effect had to be
“serious” or “significant”.
Further, paragraph 6.101 of the Guidelines provides:
… There must be more than merely an assumption or allegation that damage may
occur if the document were to be released.
The agency’s computer systems are critical to the proper and efficient delivery of its
functions, and are potentially subject to unauthorised access. Unauthorised access would
have a substantial adverse effect on the agency’s operations by compromising computer
system availability and integrity, as well as the confidentiality of customers’ information.
The document provides detailed information about the mechanics of quarantining a debt in
the Centrelink computer systems. This includes detailed information about the relevant
screens where information needs to be inputted, as well as how the inputted information
flows through the computer system.
Providing access to the document will provide detailed information to malicious actors about
the design of the agency’s computer systems. The disclosure of the document to the world at
large under the FOI process could reasonably be expected to increase the risk of
unauthorised access to the agency’s computer systems.
For the reasons detailed above, I am satisfied the document is conditionally exempt under
section 47E(d) of the FOI Act.
Public interest considerations
Section 11A(5) of the FOI Act provides:
The agency or Minister must give the person access to the document if it is
conditionally exempt at a particular time unless (in the circumstances) access to the
document at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.
When weighing up the public interest for and against disclosure under section 11A(5) of the
FOI Act, I have taken into account relevant factors in favour of disclosure. In particular, I
have considered the extent to which disclosure would promote the objects of the FOI Act.
I have also considered the relevant factors indicating access would be contrary to the public
interest. In particular, I have considered:
PAGE 4 OF 7
in circumstances where customer information is not able to be protected from
unauthorised access, the extent to which disclosure could reasonably be
expected to prejudice the future supply of similar customer information to the
agency
the extent to which disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the
security, availability and integrity of the agency’s computer systems, which in turn
prejudices the agency’s ability to properly and efficiently deliver services to the
public, and
the extent to which disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the
agency’s ability to meet its obligations under the
Privacy Act 1988 (in particular,
the obligations in relation to Australian Privacy Principle 11).
On balance, I find the public interest in disclosing the document is outweighed by the public
interest against disclosure of the document. This is because I consider there is a persuasive
public interest in ensuring the security of the agency’s computer systems, and the customer
information held within them.
I have not taken into account any of the irrelevant factors set out in section 11B(4) of the FOI
Act in making this decision.
Conclusion
In summary, I am satisfied the document is conditionally exempt under section 47E(d) of the
FOI Act. Furthermore, I have decided on balance it would be contrary to the public interest to
release this information.
PAGE 5 OF 7
Attachment B
INFORMATION ON RIGHTS OF REVIEW
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
Asking for a full explanation of a Freedom of Information decision
Before you ask for a formal review of a FOI decision, you can contact us to discuss your
request. We will explain the decision to you. This gives you a chance to correct
misunderstandings.
Asking for a formal review of an Freedom of Information decision
If you still believe a decision is incorrect, the FOI Act gives you the right to apply for a review
of the decision. Under sections 54 and 54L of the FOI Act, you can apply for a review of an
FOI decision by:
1. an Internal Review Officer in the agency, and/or
2. the Australian Information Commissioner.
Note 1: There are no fees for these reviews.
Applying for an internal review by an Internal Review Officer
If you apply for internal review, a different decision maker to the agency delegate who made
the original decision will carry out the review. The Internal Review Officer will consider all
aspects of the original decision and decide whether it should change. An application for
internal review must be:
made in writing
made within 30 days of receiving this letter, or
sent to the address at the top of the first page of this letter.
Note 2: You do not need to fill in a form. However, it is a good idea to set out any relevant
submissions you would like the Internal Review Officer to further consider, and your reasons
for disagreeing with the decision.
Applying for external review by the Australian Information Commissioner
If you do not agree with the original decision or the internal review decision, you can ask the
Australian Information Commissioner to review the decision.
If you do not receive a decision from an Internal Review Officer in the agency within 30 days
of applying, you can ask the Australian Information Commissioner for a review of the original
FOI decision.
You will have 60 days to apply in writing for a review by the Australian Information
Commissioner.
PAGE 6 OF 7
You can
lodge your application:
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Note 3: The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner generally prefers FOI
applicants to seek internal review before applying for external review by the Australian
Information Commissioner.
Important:
if you are applying online, the application form the 'Merits Review Form' is available at
www.oaic.gov.au.
if you have one, you should include with your application a copy of the Services
Australia decision on your FOI request
include your contact details, and
set out your reasons for objecting to the agency's decision.
Complaints to the Australian Information Commissioner and Commonwealth
Ombudsman
Australian Information Commissioner
You may complain to the Australian Information Commissioner concerning action taken by
an agency in the exercise of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act,
There is no fee for making a complaint. A complaint to the Australian Information
Commissioner must be made in writing. The Australian Information Commissioner's contact
details are:
Telephone: 1300 363 992
Website:
www.oaic.gov.au Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may also complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman concerning action taken by an
agency in the exercise of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act. There is
no fee for making a complaint. A complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman may be
made in person, by telephone or in writing. The Commonwealth Ombudsman's contact
details are:
Phone: 1300 362 072
Website:
www.ombudsman.gov.au
The Commonwealth Ombudsman generally prefers applicants to seek review before
complaining about a decision.
PAGE 7 OF 7
