Dear Australian Taxation Office,

I request access to the following documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982:

Documents related to the provision of 'External Service Centre Services' by Probe Operations Pty Ltd (ABN 94 624 615 925) to the Australian Taxation Office, for the period 1 July 2024 to the date of this request.

Specifically, I request:
1. The 'Activation Work Order(s)' issued to Probe Operations Pty Ltd (ABN 94 624 615 925) under Standing Offer Notice SON3926888 that are currently active and correspond with Contract Notice CN4073574.
2. Any current 'Statement of Requirements' document that applies to Contract Notice CN4073574, which may have superseded the 'Part 2 - Statement of Requirements' document from the original 'Request for Tender: ATO outsource labour for service delivery panel RFT ATO15.27'.
3. Any 'Deed of Variation' or other contractual documents that detail the scope and nature of the amendments listed on AusTender as CN4073574-A1, CN4073574-A2, CN4073574-A3, and CN4073574-A4.

Yours faithfully,
Equitas

Dear FOI Team,

Thank you for your correspondence regarding my request for "Current contract documents & amendments between ATO and Probe Operations for External Service Centre Services."

I agree to the requested 14-day extension of time.

Given the significant public interest in this matter, which relates to the expenditure of over $200 million in public funds and the administration of Commonwealth laws, I would be grateful if you would ensure this request is processed as expeditiously as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Nathan Brunne

Dear FOI Team,

I request an internal review of the decision issued on 21 November 2025 in FOI-2025-01087.

After reviewing the decision, I consider that several exemptions have been incorrectly applied and that the public interest balancing required under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) has not been properly conducted.

⸻

1. Section 45 – Breach of confidence:
The decision applies a blanket confidentiality claim without identifying any specific information that meets the legal criteria for an equitable duty of confidence. The documents concern major public expenditure and operational arrangements for outsourced ATO functions under the SPC-6894 panel. Procurement-related material of this nature is not inherently confidential, and the reasoning does not demonstrate mutual confidentiality or identify how disclosure would found an action for breach of confidence.

⸻

2. Section 47(1)(b) – Commercial value:
The decision asserts commercial value in generalised terms but does not identify:

• what information has commercial value
• how that value arises
• how disclosure would reasonably be expected to diminish it

This does not meet the threshold required by s 47(1)(b) nor the OAIC Guidelines.

⸻

3. Section 47E(d) – Substantial adverse effect on operations:
The decision relies on speculative concerns regarding procurement bargaining power and potential supplier relationship impacts. Section 47E(d) requires a real and substantial adverse effect, supported by evidence, not hypothetical risk. No specific operational harm is identified.

⸻

4. Public interest factors – Section 11B:
The public interest assessment does not adequately weigh factors favouring disclosure, including:

• transparency in the expenditure of significant public funds
• scrutiny of large-scale ATO outsourcing arrangements
• accountability for public functions performed by private contractors
• public debate concerning the integration of outsourced labour into ATO operations

These are substantial public interest considerations and should have been given significant weight.

⸻

5. SPC-6894 Outsourced Service Delivery Panel context:
The documents requested form part of the ATO’s SPC-6894 Outsourced Service Delivery Panel, which includes Probe, Serco and Concentrix performing materially identical ATO Service Delivery functions under standardised panel arrangements. This panel structure increases the public interest in transparency, as the panel governs a significant proportion of the ATO’s frontline taxpayer services and represents a long-term, high-value Commonwealth procurement framework.

The panel-wide nature of these arrangements also weakens claims of unique commercial sensitivity or detriment.

⸻

6. ATO’s own Public Interest Certificate for SPC-6894:
The ATO has issued a Public Interest Certificate (dated 10 November 2021, updated 13 February 2025) under the Government Procurement (Judicial Review) Act 2018 for SPC-6894, stating that suspending procurement activity under this panel is not in the public interest.

This demonstrates that:
1. The ATO acknowledges SPC-6894 carries heightened public interest.
2. The ATO’s reliance on public interest to justify continuity of procurement is inconsistent with its position that public interest weighs against transparency.

If the ATO asserts public interest for continuity of the panel, it is inconsistent to simultaneously assert that public interest weighs against public visibility of the contractual framework governing the same panel.

⸻

7. National media reporting confirming public importance:
There is active national scrutiny of the ATO’s reliance on outsourced labour for frontline Service Delivery work, including:

• The Guardian – “Set up to fail: ATO outsourcing to private call centres” (10 Nov 2025)
• Accountants Daily – “Outsourcing contributing to poorer ATO phone service delivery, union says” (12 Nov 2025)
• HR Leader – “Public sector union says outsourcing has contributed to worse ATO service”

These articles highlight substantial public interest in the transparency, quality and governance of outsourced ATO operations. This context materially strengthens the s 11B factors favouring disclosure.

⸻

8. Prior ATO FOI releases of equivalent contract documents:
The ATO has previously released equivalent contract materials under FOI, including the Serco Outsource Contact Centre Services Contract, which contains materially similar structures, obligations, and operational control provisions to those sought in this request.

For example, in the released Serco contract the ATO required:
• Deeds of Undertaking for all personnel
• ATO-directed training and performance standards
• Pre-Engagement Integrity Checks
• ATO authority to remove personnel
• Compliance with APS-equivalent codes and information security protocols

This demonstrates:
• These documents have been released before
• Disclosure has not caused detriment to the ATO or suppliers
• Claims of commercial harm in the present decision are inconsistent with prior ATO practice

⸻

9. Relevance to active statutory proceedings:
The documents are directly relevant to active Fair Work Commission proceedings:

• LH2025/56 – Application for Regulated Labour Hire Arrangement Order (Probe/ATO)
• LH2025/58 – Application for Determination relating to Additional Employers (Serco and Concentrix)

These matters concern the supply of labour under SPC-6894, the operational integration of contractor personnel, and the governing contractual arrangements between the ATO and panel suppliers. This places heightened public interest on understanding the contractual basis of outsourced labour arrangements currently under statutory review.

⸻

Request:
For these reasons, I request that the internal review:
1. Reassess the exemptions correctly and limit them only to genuinely exempt material.
2. Conduct a proper line-by-line review of the identified documents.
3. Reapply the section 11B public interest test with appropriate weight given to transparency, accountability, prior FOI releases and the public interest certificate for SPC-6894.
4. Release the documents in full, or with minimal redactions where truly necessary.

Please confirm receipt of this internal review request.

Kind regards,
Nathan Brunne