Agreement between Dean Robinson and ASADA
Philip Nelson made this Freedom of Information request to Department of Health
This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.
Dear Department of Health,
I am requesting a copy of any agreement, contract, or any document which may or may not be enforceable by law between Mr. Dean Robinson, an Australian fitness coach who has worked with a variety of both AFL and NRL clubs, and the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA). The agreement, contract, or any such document may include other parties and if so, is covered by this request.
I also require copies of all correspondence (electronic and print) between Mr Robinson and ASADA and any officials in preparing and finalising that agreement, contract, or any such document.
Yours faithfully,
Philip Nelson
Dear Department of Health,
I refer to my FOI request (agreement between Dean Robinson and ASADA) and confirm my request was originally lodged of 3 June. I could not find this request under my requests on the website, hence exactly the same request has been lodged again for the sake of good order.
I would expect Department of Health to honour the original request date, being 3 June, hence a response should be scheduled on or before 3 July.
I am sending this second request, dated 19 June, hoping the Department will avoid the possibility of doubling up on this FOI request.
Yours faithfully,
Philip Nelson
Dear Mr Nelson
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST – NOTIFICATION OF RECEIPT
I am writing to notify you that the Department of Health (Department) has received your request (in the below email of 19 June 2017) for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). The Department has a statutory responsibility under s15(5) to notify that a request has been received. The Department did not receive any earlier request from you, therefore, the date by which you will be provided with a decision, will be no later than 30 calendar days after the date your request was received, that being 19 June 2017. You will be contacted where a charge is applied for processing your request or if we need to consult a third party.
Unless you advise otherwise, duplicate documents and Commonwealth employee names and contact details below Senior Executive Service level and mobile telephone numbers of all staff will be considered irrelevant to the scope of your request under s22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act.
You can contact the FOI Unit on (02) 6289 1666, or via email at [email address], should you have any enquiries.
Regards
FOI Officer
Ministerial, Parliamentary, Executive Support and Governance Branch
People, Capability and Communication Division
Australian Government Department of Health
T: (02) 6289 1666 | E: [Health request email]
PO Box 9848, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
The Department of Health acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia, and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders both past and present.
Dear Mr Nelson
Please see attached correspondence in relation to your FOI request to the
Department of Health.
Regards
FOI Officer
[1]cid:image002.png@01D152AA.D704F7C0
Ministerial, Parliamentary, Executive Support and Governance Branch
People, Capability and Communication Division
Australian Government Department of Health
T: (02) 6289 1666 | E: [2][Health request email]
PO Box 9848, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
The Department of Health acknowledges the traditional owners of country
throughout Australia, and their continuing connection to land, sea and
community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders
both past and present.
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
Imagine that I use Right to Know to create an FOI request for the Department of Everything Else. I create the request on 1 January. I click all the correct buttons. It looks as if my request is lodged with DEE but in fact something is broken in Right to Know. The server does not send the request until 15 January. DEE receives my request and tells me that they will process it within 30 days (the statutory period). Is it reasonable for me to expect that DEE will process the request within 30 days from the day (1 January) when I created the request on Right to Know instead of 30 days from 15 January?
In the example with the applicant, things are even not so clear. There is no record on Right to Know to show that the request was received by the Department of Health. But more, there is no record that a request was sent from Right to Know (RtK has a separate record to show whether a server-acknowledgment was received). In fact, there is unfortunately no record on a Right to Know page that the request was created. Is there now a reason why a person should expect that the Department of Health will treat a later request as if it had been lodged at an earlier time?
In my opinion there are good reasons why the Department of Health should not stretch itself to answer the request within 30 days of 2 June 2017. The first reason is that Australian departments have said many times that the processing time for FOI requests is too short. Although, I find this surprising and do not agree with the claims from agencies that the processing time should be made longer the fact is that agencies already say that they have pressure for demands that cannot be reasonably met. Also, the law already requires the agency to do two things "as soon as practicable". The requirements are in section 15(5) of the Freedom of Information Act.
Section 15(5)... On receiving a request, the agency or Minister must:
(a) as soon as practicable but in any case not later than 14 days after the day on which the request is received by or on behalf of the agency or Minister, take all reasonable steps to enable the applicant to be notified that the request has been received; and (b) as soon as practicable but in any case not later than the end of the period of 30 days after the day on which the request is received by or on behalf of the agency or Minister, take all reasonable steps to enable the applicant to be notified of a decision on the request (including a decision under section 21 to defer the provision of access to a document).
So a question is then whether an agency should deliver a decision sooner (!) than "as soon as practicable", because this is the time in which they must already process the request.