Australia Post did not provide a decision within the required 30-day period for my request under the Freedom of Information Act. As a result, I have submitted a request for an Information Commissioner Review. My request to the Commissioner is as follows:

- Kindly remind Australia Post of their obligations under the Act;
Offer an extension of time to Australia Post to fulfill their obligations; and
- Confirm that Australia Post cannot impose any charges under these circumstances, as the decision is considered out of time according to section 4.48 of the Freedom of Information guidelines.

I wrote the following email to the OAIC:
"
I am writing to clarify some details regarding my Information Commissioner Review request under reference MR23/00834 related to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request I made to the Australian Postal Corporation.

I would like to further clarify the outcome I am seeking from the Information Commissioner in regards to my IC review request:

1. I kindly request that the Information Commissioner require the agency to provide reasons for their deemed access refusal decision.
2. I request that the Information Commissioner allow the agency more time to make an actual decision.
3. If the agency makes an unfavorable actual decision, I request that the Information Commissioner vary the decision of the agency to an access grant decision, requiring the agency to fulfill the request in full. If the Information Commissioner review finds that a practical refusal reason exists, I request that the agency initiate the request consultation process.
4. I also respectfully request that the Information Commissioner investigate the agency's processes to ensure future FOI requests are handled in a timely and efficient manner. If this is not possible administratively, I would appreciate information regarding my options to lodge an FOI complaint.

Finally, I would like to request that the decision of the IC review be copied to the public Right To Know email thread located at https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/d... addressed to me as CR.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
CR
"

I wrote the following email to the OAIC:

Dear Office of the Australian Information Commissioner,

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you of a recent development in my FOI request to Australia Post and to express my intention to proceed with an IC review.

Yesterday (09/08/2023), I received a revised decision from Australia Post, granting partial access to some documents, with redacted information. Australia Post contends that the redacted information is exempt from the FOI request based on their interpretation of commercial activities. However, I strongly believe that the redacted information should not be exempt for the following reasons:

1. The missort data itself does not reveal any commercially sensitive information that could harm Australia Post's competitive position. It simply provides statistics on misdirected mail, with no insight into pricing, operations, or other proprietary information. The redacted volume is unlikely to reveal revenue figures, customer details, or strategic plans. The data indicates only the volume handled by Australia Post's sorting systems, which alone does not constitute commercial activities.

2. The intent of the FOI Act is to promote government transparency and accountability. Public access to data on how accurately Australia Post delivers mail serves this purpose, given Australia Post's statutory monopoly powers. Courts have interpreted exemptions narrowly and in favour of disclosure wherever possible, consistent with Parliament's intention that provisions be interpreted to “facilitate and promote public access to information, promptly and at the lowest reasonable cost" (Section 3(4) of the Act.)

3. The missort data was likely collected primarily for operational improvement and quality control, not commercial gain. Reducing missorts and improving sortation systems serve Australia Post's fundamental purpose of reliably delivering mail, irrespective of revenue generation. Continuous monitoring of missort rates is essential to ensuring sortation accuracy and reliability of postal services for all Australians.

4. The missort data could reveal systemic issues impacting Australia Post's operations beyond profit margins. It indicates a focus on ensuring accurate and reliable postal services for all customers, commercial and non-commercial alike.

5. Disclosing the missort data could promote transparency around postal services, consistent with the objects of the FOI Act. The data was not created exclusively for commercial gain but also in the broader public interest.

Considering the aforementioned reasons, I firmly believe that the requested disclosure of missort data aligns with the spirit of transparency and accountability inherent in the FOI Act. It cannot be justifiably exempted on the grounds of commercial activities.

I do not wish to contend the s24A refusal decision for the second part of my FOI request.

I kindly request to proceed with the IC review.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

CR