File notes about vetoing decisions for SES selection process

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Australian Public Service Commission should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Australian Public Service Commission,

This email is a request in writing for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982. You may send notices and documents to me at the email address associated with this request.

I refer to an article published in the Australian. The article was published on 10 February 2022. The article was authored by Kylar Loussikian and Jill Rowbotham. The title of the article is “Top judge warned of registrar overhaul”.

The article is about the reclassification of a Senior Executive Service position by Mr Soden and Ms Lagos, the former and current Chief Executives of the Federal Court respectively, to avoid what Mr Soden claimed was the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s representative’s veto on a decision to promote a registrar to the Senior Executive Service position.

In that article, Justice Greenwood of the Federal Court states that “[the registrar] was ultimately appointed to the role at the (lower level) configured in a way as determined by Mr Soden and Ms Lagos, no doubt in discussion with the APSC.” Justice Greenwood also states, in an internal memo, that “[Mr Soden’s] advice that the APSC has a veto on appointment is wrong …”

I also refer to the decision (and attachments to that decision) of Ms Giorgina Strangio of the Australian Public Service Commission: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/v...

According to the attachment to Ms Strangio’s decision, it appears as though Kerryn Vine-Camp, the First Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Public Service Commission, was the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s representative for the selection process for the Senior Executive Band 1 “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position in the Federal Court.

Please provide access to:

a) all notes, including file notes, made by Kerryn Vine-Camp in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp claimed to have a veto power in relation to the selection process;
b) all notes, including file notes, made by Kerryn Vine-Camp in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp threatened to use that veto power in relation to the selection process;
c) all notes, including file notes, made by Kerryn Vine-Camp in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp claimed that the Commissioner had a veto power in relation to the selection process;
d) all notes, including file notes, made by Kerryn Vine-Camp in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp threatened that the Commissioner would use that veto power in relation to the selection process;
e) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by members of the selection panel for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp claimed to have a veto power in relation to the selection process;
f) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by members of the selection panel for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that the Australian Public Service Commissioner claimed to have a veto power in relation to the selection process;
g) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by members of the selection panel for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp threatened to use that veto power in relation to the selection process;
h) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by members of the selection panel for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that the Australian Public Service Commissioner threatened to use that veto power in relation to the selection process;
i) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by Warwick Soden in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp claimed to have a veto power in relation to the selection process;
j) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by Warwick Soden in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that Ms Vine-Camp threatened to use a veto power in relation to the selection process;
k) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by Warwick Soden in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that the Australian Public Service Commissioner claimed to have a veto power in relation to the selection process;
l) all notes, including file notes, provided to Kate McMullan that were made by Warwick Soden in relation to the selection process for the “National Judicial Registrar & District Registrar – QLD” position that suggest that the Australian Public Service Commissioner threatened to use a veto power in relation to the selection process.

Yours faithfully,

Michael V

FOI, Australian Public Service Commission

5 Attachments

OFFICIAL

Dear Applicant

 

We are writing about your request under the Freedom of Information Act
1982 (FOI Act) received 16 March 2022 (Agency Reference SHC22-4699).

 

Transfer of request

 

Section 16(1) of the FOI Act provides:

 

(1)  Where a request is made to an agency for access to a document and:

(a)  the document is not in the possession of that agency but is, to the
knowledge of that agency, in the possession of another agency; or

(b)  the subject-matter of the document is more closely connected with the
functions of another agency than with those of the agency to which the
request is made;

the agency to which the request is made may, with the agreement of the
other agency, transfer the request to the other agency.

 

Your request has been transferred to the Federal Court of Australia.
Please direct future matters about this request to [1][email address].

 

Regards

 

FOI OFFICER

Legal Services

 

Australian Public Service Commission

Level 4, B Block, Treasury Building, Parkes Place West, PARKES ACT 2600
GPO Box 3176 CANBERRA ACT 2601

 

t: 02 6202 3500  w: [2]www.apsc.gov.au        

[3]three hexagons[4]twitter icon [5]facebook
icon                          

 

 

 

 

This email and any attachments may contain confidential or legally
privileged information, and neither are waived or lost if the email has
been sent in error. If you have received this email in error, please
delete it (including any copies) and notify the sender. Please consult
with APSC Legal Services before using disclosing any part of this email or
attachments to a third party.

 

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

External FOI,

3 Attachments

OFFICIAL

 

Dear Michael

 

Please find attached correspondence from the Federal Court of Australia.

 

Kind regards

 

FOI Officer

Federal Court of Australia

 

External FOI,

3 Attachments

OFFICIAL

 

Dear Michael

 

Please find attached correspondence from the Federal Court of Australia.

 

Kind regards

 

FOI Officer

Federal Court of Australia