SEC=OFFICIAL
Reference:
FOI 22/112
Contact:
FOI Team
E-mail:
xxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Oliver Smith
Right to Know
By email only:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Smith,
Freedom of Information Request – FOI 22/112
On 21 November 2022, the Department of Finance (Finance) received your email, in which
you sought access under the Commonwealth
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) to
the following:
I am seeking access to the government-provided official car service (ComCar) records for the Minister for
Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs for the period 1 September 2022 to 20 November
2022.
Can this drop off and pick up information please be provided to the street level, and if not, the suburb
level.
To avoid any privacy issues, please redact the minister's home address fully where it appears. These
occurances can be noted as 'home', and redact the street number of all pick up and drop off addresses.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with notice of my decision under the FOI Act.
Authorised decision-maker
I am authorised by the Secretary of Finance to grant or refuse access to documents.
Produced a document
I have decided under section 17 of the FOI Act to produce a document that contains the
information you have requested, as the information did not exist in a discrete written form.
Decision
I have produced one document that contains the information that falls within the scope of
your request, and have decided to release that document to you, with certain information
redacted under section 47F of the FOI Act.
One Canberra Avenue, Forrest ACT 2603 Internet www.finance.gov.au
SEC=OFFICIAL
In making my decision, I have had regard to the following:
the terms of your FOI request;
the content of the document that was produced;
third party consultation;
the relevant provisions of the FOI Act; and
the FOI Guidelines issued by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
(FOI Guidelines).
Personal privacy – section 47F
Section 47F of the FOI Act provides that:
(1) A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would involve the unreasonable
disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person).
The purpose of this exemption is to prevent the unreasonable invasion of third parties’
personal privacy.
Personal information
Consistent with section 4 of the FOI Act and section 6 of the
Privacy Act 1988, personal
information means information or an opinion, whether true or not, and whether recorded in a
material form or not, about an individual who is reasonably identifiable.
The document contains street addresses of a number of locations that the Minister for
Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, the Hon Andrew Giles MP (the
Minister) attended during the requested period.
I am satisfied that locations that the Minister travelled to is personal information about the
Minister.
Unreasonable disclosure
Section 47F of the FOI Act further provides:
(2) In determining whether the disclosure of a document would involve the unreasonable disclosure of
personal information, an agency or Minister must have regard to the following matters:
(a) the extent to which the information is well known;
(b) whether the person to whom the information relates is known to be (or to have been)
associated with the matters dealt with in the document;
(c) the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources;
(d) any other matters that the agency or Minister considers relevant.
The FOI Guidelines provide:
6.142 Key factors for determining whether disclosure is unreasonable include:
(a) the author of the document is identifiable
(b) the documents contain third party personal information
(c) release of the documents would cause stress on the third party
(d) no public purpose would be achieved through release
6.143 As discussed in the leading s 47F IC review decision of ‘FG’ and National Archives of Australia
[2015] AICmr 26, other factors considered to be relevant include:
the nature, age and current relevance of the information
any detriment that disclosure may cause to the person to whom the information relates
any opposition to disclosure expressed or likely to be held by that person
the circumstances of an agency’s collection and use of the information
2
SEC=OFFICIAL
the fact that the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination of
information released under the FOI Act
any submission an FOI applicant chooses to make in support of their application as to their
reasons for seeking access and their intended or likely use or dissemination of the information,
and
whether disclosure of the information might advance the public interest in government
transparency and integrity.
COMCAR provides car-with-driver services to parliamentarians when undertaking
parliamentary business, and to Ministers (including parliamentary secretaries) and shadow
ministers for their personal safety when their private plated vehicle or private vehicle could
not reasonably be used.
I consider that as the personal information relates to the Minister’s travel, which was
publicly funded, it would not be unreasonable to release the majority of the information
contained in the document.
I consider that it would be unreasonable to release the following information:
• the Minister’s home addresses;
• all private residential addresses;
• the Minister’s accommodation while travelling; and
• certain particulars of flight details and locations.
The Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority (IPEA) publishes quarterly reports on
the spending of parliamentarians. This public report provides transparency which contributes
to ensuring public resources are used for the dominant purpose of parliamentary business.
I am satisfied that the information contained in the document is not well known. Although
the information reported in a parliamentarians quarterly IPEA Expenditure Report details the
COMCAR trips taken within the quarter, this information is limited to the area, date and cost
of the trip. It does not list the details sought within this FOI request, which includes pick up
and drop off street addresses.
I consider that disclosure of the Minister’s private residential address or where he stays
while travelling may cause security issues and enable his whereabouts to be traced. Further
this applies to certain particulars of flight details and certain locations.
I consider that releasing private street addresses could reasonably be expected to cause
distress to the occupants/owners, as this may result in unwanted incursion into their private
life.
For the reasons mention above, I consider that it would be unreasonable to disclose the
Minister’s home address, the address of residential address, religious locations, and
accommodation details of where the Minister stays while travelling. Accordingly, I consider
this information is conditionally exempt under section 47F of the FOI Act.
Public interest test
Having formed the view that the document is conditionally exempt, I am now required to
consider the public interest test for the purposes of determining whether access to this
conditionally exempt document would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.
3
SEC=OFFICIAL
Section 11A of the FOI Act provides:
(5) 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.
Factors favouring disclosure
Section 11B of the FOI Act provides:
(3) Factors favouring access to the document in the public interest include whether access to the document
would do any of the following:
(a) promote the objects of this Act (including all the matters set out in sections 3 and 3A);
(b) inform debate on a matter of public importance;
(c) promote effective oversight of public expenditure;
(c) allow a person to access his or her own personal information.
The FOI Guidelines provide a non-exhaustive list of factors that may favour disclosure.
The factors favouring disclosure in this case include that it would promote the objections of
the FOI Act and further promote transparency over public expenditure as COMCAR travel
is public funded. I attribute minimal weight to these factors as the COMCAR trips, date and
costs have already been publicly disclosed.
Factors against disclosure
The FOI Act does not list any factors weighing against disclosure that are required to be
considered.
The FOI Guidelines provide a non-exhaustive list of factors against disclosure, of which I
consider that the release of the documents could reasonably be expected to:
• prejudice the protection of an individual’s right to privacy
• harm the interests of an individual or group of individuals.
I attribute significant weight to the factors against disclosure because of the reasonably held
expectations of parliamentarians that their home address, residential addresses that they
attend, and that their security would not be put at risk by releasing their whereabouts or
certain particular details regarding flights and locations that could impact the security of the
Minister or the location visited.
Irrelevant factors
Section 11B of the FOI Act provides:
(4) The following factors must not be taken into account in deciding whether access to the document
would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest:
(a) access to the document could result in embarrassment to the Commonwealth Government, or
cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government:
(b) access to the document could result in any person misinterpreting or misunderstanding the
document;
(c) the author of the document was (or is) of high seniority in the agency to which the request for
access to the document was made;
(d) access to the document could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
I have not considered the above irrelevant factors.
4
SEC=OFFICIAL
Balancing public interest factors
The FOI Guidelines provide:
To conclude that, on balance, disclosure of a document would be contrary to the public interest is to
conclude that the benefit to the public resulting from disclosure is outweighed by the benefit to the public
of withholding the information. The decision maker must analyse, in each case, where on balance the
public interest lies based on the particular facts of the matter at the time the decision is made.
I consider that disclosure would promote the objects of the FOI Act and promote
transparency of public expenditure. However, I place greater weight on protecting against
the detriment that disclosure may cause to the Minister and the other individual/s and
location to whom the information relates.
As such, I consider that the release of the conditionally exempt information, on balance,
would be contrary to the public interest.
Exempt information removed from the document
I have redacted exempt information from the document and released the edited form of the
document to you.
Charges
I have decided that a charge is not payable in this matter.
Third party consultation
Finance consulted with the Minister and provided him with a copy of the document with our
proposed redactions. We did not receive any objections to the release of the document with
the personal information redacted.
Review and appeal rights
You are entitled to request an internal review or a review by the Office of the Australian
Information Commissioner of my decision. The process for review and appeal rights is set
out at
Attachment A.
Publication
Finance will publish the document released to you on our
Disclosure Log. Finance’s policy
is to publish the document the next working day after it is released to you.
If you have any questions in regards to this request, please contact the FOI Team on the
above contact details.
Yours sincerely,
Amy Lambart
A/g Assistant Secretary
COMCAR and Programs | Ministerial & Parliamentary
Department of Finance
20 January 2023
5
SEC=OFFICIAL
ATTACHMENT A
Freedom of Information – Your Review Rights
If you disagree with a decision made by the Department of Finance (Finance) or the
Minister for Finance (Minister) under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act)
you can have the decision reviewed. You may want to seek review if you sought certain
documents and were not given full access, if you have been informed that there will be a
charge for processing your request, if you have made a contention against the release of
the documents that has not been agreed to by Finance or the Minister, or if your
application to have your personal information amended was not accepted. There are two
ways you can seek a review of our decision: an internal review (IR) by Finance or the
Minister, or an external review (ER) by the Australian Information Commissioner (IC).
Internal Review (IR)
Third parties
If, Finance or the Minister (we/our), makes a
If you are a third party objecting to a decision
Freedom of Information (FOI) decision that
to grant someone else access to your
you disagree with, you can seek a review of
information, you must apply to the IC within
the original decision. The review will carried
30 calendar days of being notified of our
out by a different decision maker, usually
decision to release your information.
someone at a more senior level.
Further assistance is locate
d here.
You must apply for an IR within 30 calendar
Do I have to go through the internal
days of being notified of the decision or
review process?
charge, unless we agree to extend your time.
No. You may apply directly to the OAIC for
You should contact us if you wish to seek an
an ER by the IC.
extension.
If I apply for an internal review, do I
We are required to make an IR decision
lose the opportunity to apply for an
within 30 calendar days of receiving your
external review?
application. If we do not make an IR decision
within this timeframe, then the original
No. You have the same ER rights of our IR
decision stands.
decision as you do with our original decision.
This means you can apply for an ER of the
Review by the Australian
original decision or of the IR decision.
Information Commissioner (IC)
Do I have to pay for an internal review
The Office of the Australian Information
or external review?
Commissioner (OAIC) is an independent
office who can undertake an ER of our
No. Both the IR and ER are free.
decision under the FOI Act. The IC can
review access refusal decisions, access grant
decisions, refusals to extend the period for
applying for an IR, and IR decisions.
If you are objecting to a decision to refuse
access to a document, impose a charge, or a
refusal to amend personal information, you
must apply in writing to the IC within 60
calendar days of receiving our decision.
6
SEC=OFFICIAL
How do I apply?
Can I appeal the Information
Commissioner’s external review
Internal review
decision?
To apply for an IR of the decision of either
Yes. You can appeal the Information
Finance or the Minister, you must send your
Commissioner’s ER decision to the
review in writing. We both use the same
Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
contact details, and you must send your
review request in writing.
There is a fee for lodging an AAT application
(as at 12 October 2022 it is $1,011).
In your written correspondence, please
include the following:
Further information is accessibl
e here.
a statement that you are seeking a review
The AAT’s number is 1800 228 333.
of our decision;
attach a copy of the decision you are
Complaints
seeking a review of; and
state the reasons why you consider the
Making a complaint to the Office of the
original decision maker made the wrong
Australian Information Commissioner
decision.
You may make a written complaint to the
Email: xxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx
OAIC about actions taken by us in relation to
your application.
Post: The FOI Coordinator
Legal and Assurance Branch
Further information on lodging a complaint is
Department of Finance
accessible
here.
One Canberra Avenue
FORREST ACT 2603
Investigation by the Commonwealth
Ombudsman
External review (Information
The Ombudsman can also investigate
Commissioner Review)
complaints about action taken by agencies
For an ER, you must apply to the OAIC in
under the FOI Act. However, if the issue
writing. The OAIC ask that you commence a
complained about either could be, or has been,
review by completing their online form
here.
investigated by the IC, the Ombudsman will
consult with the IC to avoid the same matter
Your application must include a copy of the
being investigated twice. If the Ombudsman
notice of our decision that you are objecting
decides not to investigate the complaint, then
to, and your contact details. You should also
they are to transfer all relevant documents and
set out why you are objecting to the decision.
information to the IC.
Email: xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
The IC can also transfer a complaint to the
Ombudsman where appropriate. This could
Post: Office of the Australian Information
occur where the FOI complaint is only one
part of a wider grievance about an agency’s
Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
actions. You will be notified in writing if your
Sydney NSW 2001
complaint is transferred.
The IC’s enquiries phone line is
Complaints to the Ombudsman should be
1300 363 992.
made online
here.
The Ombudsman’s number is 1300 362 072.
7
