External review of NDIA FOI 25/26-0105
Dear Office of the Australian Information Commissioner,
I hereby request an external review from the Office of the Australian Commissioner (OAIC) of the NDIA's response to my FOI request 25/26-0105 - see https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/b...
The agency has refused access to my request on the basis of section 24(1)(b) of the FOI Act - practical refusal – specifically on the grounds that it would take 4-5 hours to process each of the 68 documents requested.
I do not believe this to be a credible estimate.
One example of the type of briefing that I have requested has already been provided as part of a separate FOI request, being NDIS FOI 24/25-0251, document 2, which is available at this link – https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/f...
This briefing, including attachments, is 11 pages in length. I do not accept that it would take the NDIA’s FOI unit 4-5 hours to process such a document type.
Advice previously given by the agency is that it reviews documents at a rate of 3 minutes per page. See here - https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/1...
Based on this rate, each briefing that I have requested would need to be approximately 80-100 pages in length in order for the agency to take 4-5 hours to process it.
It should be noted that the NDIA’s decision letter states that of the sample of 7 documents reviewed, ‘5 documents contained more than 1 attachment’ and ‘each document was more than five pages’, but it does not disclose the total number of pages contained in the 7 sample documents.
I find it very hard to believe that the briefings of the type I have requested are all in the order of 80-100 pages.
The agency has therefore not validated and justified it’s claim, and I ask that OAIC investigates this matter and interrogates the basis of the NDIA’s estimate, which it cites as a basis for the practical refusal.
Yours faithfully,
David Wright
Thank you for your email which has been received by the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).
Notice:
The information contained in this email message and any attached files may
be confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient any use,
disclosure or copying of this email is unauthorised. If you received this
email in error, please notify the sender by contacting the department's
switchboard on 1300 488 064 during business hours (8:30am - 5pm Canberra
time) and delete all copies of this transmission together with any
attachments.
Our reference: MR25/02485
By email: [1][FOI #14034 email]
Agency: National Disability Insurance Agency
Agency reference: FOI 25/26-0105
Receipt of your IC review application
Thank you for your application for Information Commissioner Review (IC
review).
The [2]OAIC service charter sets out the standard of service you can
expect from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)
and explains how you can assist us to help you.
Information about the Information Commissioner review process is set out
in:
• [3]How we handle an IC review application.
• the [4]Direction as to certain procedures to be followed by applicants
in Information Commissioner reviews issued under s 55(2)(e)(i) of the
FOI Act.
The OAIC is considering a large number of applications. Information about
the OAIC’s IC review caseload and focus areas can be found at [5]Caseload
reports and focus areas.
The OAIC will be in contact with you regarding whether the OAIC is able to
review your application and if so, whether the OAIC has commenced review
of your application. The respondent agency or minister may also engage
with you directly in relation to your IC review application if we decide
to review its decision.
You may experience long delays as we review your application particularly
if it does not involve an issue within the OAIC’s focus areas. The OAIC is
not able to provide substantive updates on the progress of your
application and is unable to accommodate requests to expedite matters.
You may wish to contact the agency that dealt with your FOI request to
attempt to resolve the matter. Agencies are required to deal with FOI
requests in accordance with the [6]FOI Guidelines. These Guidelines may
also assist you to make your submissions in your IC review.
Further information about the IC review process is outlined in [7]Part 10
of the [8]FOI Guidelines.
Yours sincerely
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
[9]A blue Intake and Eligibility Branch
background
with white Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
text
AI-generated Sydney | GPO Box 5288 Sydney NSW 2001
content may be
incorrect. P: 1300 363 992
W: [10]Enquiry form
The OAIC acknowledges Traditional Custodians of Country across
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and
communities. We pay our respect to First Nations people, cultures
and Elders past and present.
[11]Subscribe to Information Matters
Notice:
The information contained in this email message and any attached files may
be confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient any use,
disclosure or copying of this email is unauthorised. If you received this
email in error, please notify the sender by contacting the department's
switchboard on 1300 488 064 during business hours (8:30am - 5pm Canberra
time) and delete all copies of this transmission together with any
attachments.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #14034 email]
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/about-the-OAIC/o...
3. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
4. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
5. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
7. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
8. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
9. https://www.oaic.gov.au/
10. https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entityt...
11. https://www.oaic.gov.au/engage-with-us/n...
Our reference: MR25/02485
Agency reference: FOI 25/26-0105
By email: [FOI #14034 email]
Extension of time decision under s 54T of the FOI Act
Dear David,
I refer to your IC review application about a deemed access refusal
decision made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (the Agency)
under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act). As your IC review
application has been made outside of the 60-day timeframe in s 54S of the
FOI Act due to a deemed access refusal, I have considered the lodgement of
your IC review application to be an extension of time request under s 54T
of the FOI Act pursuant to para. 10.48 of the Freedom of information
guidelines.
Your IC review application has been made outside of the statutory
timeframe in s 54S of the FOI Act, as indicated by the following timeline:
• 15 July 2025: FOI request made (due 14 August 2025)
• 24 July 2025: s 15AA extension of time agreed to by Applicant (30 days
extended; due 13 September 2025) - As 13 September 2025 is a Saturday,
the final day to notify the applicant of the decision is Monday 15
September 2025.
• 13 September 2025: Deemed refused
• 21 November 2025: Purported original decision notified by Agency
• 12 November 2025: Last day for applying for IC review under s 54S
• 24 November 2025: IC review application received (12 days overdue)
As a delegate of the Information Commissioner, I am authorised to make
decisions on extension of time requests under s 54T of the FOI Act.
In making my decision under s 54T of the FOI Act, I have considered the
following factors:
• The Agency has provided you with a substantive decision which is
arguably a decision made out of jurisdiction, as the initial decision
period of your FOI request ended and a deemed refusal decision was
made, on 13 September 2025.
• The length of the delay in applying for IC review is 12 days which is
not a significant period.
• It appears you were unaware that the deemed refusal decision was the
correct IC reviewable decision.
• I consider that the delay in making the IC review application has not
caused any prejudice to the Agency or the general public. This is
because the Agency notified you of a purported original decision on 21
November 2025, and you made the IC review application on 24 November
2025.
Based on the information before the OAIC, I am satisfied that granting an
extension of time under s 54T of the FOI Act is reasonable in all the
circumstances.
I have decided under s 54T of the FOI Act to grant your extension of time
request.
As such, your IC review is taken to have been lodged within the statutory
timeframe. We will write to you about the progress of your IC review in
due course.
If you would like to discuss this matter, I can be reached by email at
[1][email address]. Please quote the reference number at the top of this
email in all correspondence.
Review rights
Judicial review
If you disagree with the OAIC’s decision you can apply to the Federal
Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court for a review of a decision
of the Information Commissioner if you think that a decision by the
Information Commissioner to grant an extension of time is not legally
correct. You can make this application under the Administrative Decisions
(Judicial Review) Act 1977.
The Court will not review the merits of your case but it may refer the
matter back to the Information Commissioner for further consideration if
it finds the decision was wrong in law or the Information Commissioner’s
powers were not exercised properly.
An application for review must be made to the Court within 28 days of the
OAIC sending the decision to you. You may wish to seek legal advice as the
process can involve fees and costs. Please contact the Federal Court
registry in your state or territory for more information, or visit the
Federal Court website at [2]http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/.
Making a complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman
If you believe you have been treated unfairly by the OAIC, you can make a
complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman (the Ombudsman). The Ombudsman's
services are free. The Ombudsman can investigate complaints about the
administrative actions of Australian Government agencies to see if you
have been treated unfairly.
If the Ombudsman finds your complaint is justified, the Ombudsman can
recommend that the OAIC reconsider or change its action or decision or
take any other action that the Ombudsman considers is appropriate. You can
contact the Ombudsman's office for more information on 1300 362 072 or
visit the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s website at
[3]http://www.ombudsman.gov.au.
Accessing your information
If you would like access to the information that we hold about you, please
contact [4][email address]. More information is available on
the [5]Access our information page on our website.
Kind regards,
Alex
[6]A blue Intake and Eligibility Branch
background
with white Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
text
AI-generated Sydney | GPO Box 5288 Sydney NSW 2001
content may be
incorrect. P: 1300 363 992
W: [7]Enquiry form
The OAIC acknowledges Traditional Custodians of Country across
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and
communities. We pay our respect to First Nations people, cultures
and Elders past and present.
[8]Subscribe to Information Matters
Notice:
The information contained in this email message and any attached files may
be confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient any use,
disclosure or copying of this email is unauthorised. If you received this
email in error, please notify the sender by contacting the department's
switchboard on 1300 488 064 during business hours (8:30am - 5pm Canberra
time) and delete all copies of this transmission together with any
attachments.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/
3. http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/
4. mailto:[email address]
5. https://www.oaic.gov.au/about-us/access-...
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/
7. https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entityt...
8. https://www.oaic.gov.au/engage-with-us/n...
David Wright left an annotation ()
The increased rate by which I am needing to seek external review of these decisions suggests you are correct
Rick left an annotation ()
Am I the only one noticing quality drops in FOI decisions?