We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are GIPAgoomar please sign in and let everyone know.

Independent investigations and review - Deborah Glass

GIPAgoomar made this Freedom of Information request to Commonwealth Ombudsman

1 follower

We're waiting for GIPAgoomar to read recent responses and update the status.

Dear Commonwealth Ombudsman,

A contract was entered into, on 21 July 2025, with the former Ombudsman of the State of Victoria, Ms Deborah Glass, so that Ms Glass would conduct independent investigation and review services - see contract CN4183579 on www.tenders.gov.au.

Under the FOI Act 1982 (Cth), I request access to the following documents:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions, request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g. by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

Please provide the requested documents by return email.

Yours faithfully,

GIPAgoomar

image001.png

5K Download

OFFICIAL

Our ref: FOI-2025-80118

Dear GIPAgoomar

Freedom of Information request – Acknowledgment

I acknowledge receipt of your email dated 7 September 2025 to the Office
of the Commonwealth Ombudsman (the Office), in which you requested access
to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). Your
request for documents was in the following terms:

“A contract was entered into, on 21 July 2025, with the former Ombudsman
of the State of Victoria, Ms Deborah Glass, so that Ms Glass would conduct
independent investigation and review services - see contract CN4183579 on
[1]www.tenders.gov.au.

Under the FOI Act 1982 (Cth), I request access to the following documents:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the
provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions,
request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g.
by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

Please provide the requested documents by return email.”

Timeframes

The FOI Act requires us to provide notice of a decision on your request
within 30 days from the date we received a valid FOI request. Therefore, a
decision for your request will be provided to you on or before 7 October
2025. This 30-day period may be extended if we need to consult third
parties, or for other reasons. We will let you know if this happens.

If you have any questions, you may contact me via email at
[2][email address]

Sincerely

David

Legal Officer

Legal Team – Defence, Investigations, ACT, Legal (DIAL) Branch
[3]A black and white logo 1300 362 072
Description automatically generated
[4][email address]

The Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, culture and community. We pay our respects to elders past and
present.

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tenders.gov.au/
2. mailto:[email address]
4. mailto:[email address]

image001.png

5K Download
FOI 2025 80118 decision letter.pdf

143K Download View as HTML

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

I attach correspondence in relation to your request:

1. Decision letter dated 3 October 2025

Please do not hesitate to contact me via reply email if you have any
questions or concerns.

Sincerely

David

Legal Officer

Legal Team – Defence, Investigations, ACT, Legal (DIAL) Branch
[1]A black and white logo 1300 362 072
Description automatically generated
[2][email address]

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]

FOI-2025-80118

Dear David Yalpi,

Please pass this to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Commonwealth Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Independent investigations and review - Deborah Glass'.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: http://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/in...

Yours faithfully,

GIPAgoomar

image001.png

87K Download

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Your internal review request of 3 October 2025 Freedom of Information
(FOI) decision

We refer to your request received by the Office of the Commonwealth
Ombudsman (Office) on 15 October 2025 seeking an internal review of the
Office’s 3 October 2025 FOI decision made under the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 (FOI Act). Your 7 September 2025 request for information made
under the FOI Act is in the following terms

A contract was entered into, on 21 July 2025, with the former Ombudsman of
the State of Victoria, Ms Deborah Glass, so that Ms Glass would conduct
independent investigation and review services - see contract CN4183579 on
[1]www.tenders.gov.au.

Under the FOI Act 1982 (Cth), I request access to the following documents:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the
provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions,
request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g.
by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

The internal review will be conducted by an officer who was not involved
in the original decision.

A decision of your review request will be made within 30 days of the date
if was received. This will be on or before Friday 14 November 2025. If the
Office requires additional time to process your request, we will let you
know.

Kind regards

Clare

[2]A circular design with a Clare
circle in the middle
Description automatically Senior Legal Officer
generated
Defence, Investigations, ACT & Legal Branch

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tenders.gov.au/

image001.png

87K Download

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Your internal review request of 3 October 2025 Freedom of Information
(FOI) decision

I refer to your request of 15 October 2025 seeking an internal review of
the Office’s decision dated 3 October 2025 made under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).

To assist us in conducting the internal review, please advise if there are
specific matters you would like the Office to consider. For example, you
may wish to raise concerns about the adequacy of the searches undertaken
or the application of particular exemptions by the original decision
maker.

I would be grateful if you could provide this information by Monday 11
November 2025.

Kind regards

Clare

[1]A circular design with Senior Legal Officer
a circle in the middle
Description automatically Defence, Investigations, ACT & Legal Branch
generated
Proud to be working on the lands of the
Wurundjeri Woi-wurrung and Bunurong Boon
Wurrung Peoples of the Eastern Kulin

From: Information Access <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 16 October 2025 11:52 AM
To: [FOI #13613 email]
Cc: Information Access <[email address]>
Subject: FOI-2025-80118 - acknowledgement of your internal review request
[SEC=OFFICIAL]

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Your internal review request of 3 October 2025 Freedom of Information
(FOI) decision

A contract was entered into, on 21 July 2025, with the former Ombudsman of
the State of Victoria, Ms Deborah Glass, so that Ms Glass would conduct
independent investigation and review services - see contract CN4183579 on
[2]www.tenders.gov.au.

Under the FOI Act 1982 (Cth), I request access to the following documents:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the
provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions,
request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g.
by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

The internal review will be conducted by an officer who was not involved
in the original decision.

Kind regards

Clare

[3]A circular design with a Clare
circle in the middle
Description automatically Senior Legal Officer
generated
Defence, Investigations, ACT & Legal Branch

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
2. http://www.tenders.gov.au/

image001.png

87K Download
FOI 2025 80118 IR decision GIPAgoomar.pdf

151K Download View as HTML

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Please find attached internal review decision relating to your 7 September
2025 Freedom of Information request.

Kind regards

Clare

From: Information Access <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2025 5:37 PM
To: [FOI #13613 email]
Cc: Information Access <[email address]>
Subject: FOI-2025-80118 - further information [SEC=OFFICIAL]

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Your internal review request of 3 October 2025 Freedom of Information
(FOI) decision

I refer to your request of 15 October 2025 seeking an internal review of
the Office’s decision dated 3 October 2025 made under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).

I would be grateful if you could provide this information by Monday 11
November 2025.

Kind regards

Clare

[2]A circular design with Senior Legal Officer
a circle in the middle
Description automatically Defence, Investigations, ACT & Legal Branch
generated
Proud to be working on the lands of the
Wurundjeri Woi-wurrung and Bunurong Boon
Wurrung Peoples of the Eastern Kulin

From: Information Access <[3][email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 16 October 2025 11:52 AM
To: [4][FOI #13613 email]
Cc: Information Access <[5][email address]>
Subject: FOI-2025-80118 - acknowledgement of your internal review request
[SEC=OFFICIAL]

OFFICIAL

Dear GIPAgoomar

Your internal review request of 3 October 2025 Freedom of Information
(FOI) decision

A contract was entered into, on 21 July 2025, with the former Ombudsman of
the State of Victoria, Ms Deborah Glass, so that Ms Glass would conduct
independent investigation and review services - see contract CN4183579 on
[6]www.tenders.gov.au.

Under the FOI Act 1982 (Cth), I request access to the following documents:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the
provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions,
request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g.
by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

The internal review will be conducted by an officer who was not involved
in the original decision.

Kind regards

Clare

[7]A circular design with a Clare
circle in the middle
Description automatically Senior Legal Officer
generated
Defence, Investigations, ACT & Legal Branch

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
3. mailto:[email address]
4. mailto:[FOI #13613 email]
5. mailto:[email address]
6. http://www.tenders.gov.au/

GIPAgoomar left an annotation (November 28, 2025)

REASONS FOR IC REVIEW

In this post, I note my reasons for applying for IC review.

This post will be structures along the lines of my FOI request, which was submitted to the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman on 7 September 2025: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/i...

In my FOI request, I requested access to:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions, request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g. by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

PART A OF MY REQUEST

I requested a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the provision of the independent investigation and review services.

It is not clear which of the exemptions have been applied by Clare Miller to this document in her reasons for internal review: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/1...

For that reason, I will be forced to address each of the exemptions she has claimed.

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

It is very highly unlikely that a contract entered into with Deborah Glass by the Commonwealth Ombudsman contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Why would any information about a confidential source of information be contained in a contract for services? No reasons have been provided to support such a contention by Clare Miller. Even if such information were contained in the document, Clare Miller has not addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services would not be permissible.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is very highly unlikely that a contract entered into with Deborah Glass by the Commonwealth Ombudsman contains any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

Why would information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures be contained in a contract for independent review services?

In any case, documents setting out methods of investigation on the part of the staff in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman are published in manuals on the Commonwealth Ombudsman's website and elsewhere – see, for example:

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to a copy of a contract for services entered into with Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are also public information.

Clare Miller cannot merely assert that an effect will occur following disclosure. The particulars of the predicted effect should be identified during the decision-making process, including whether the effect could reasonably be expected to occur. Where the conditional exemption is relied on, the relevant particulars and reasons should form part of the decision maker’s statement of reasons: FOI Guidelines, 6.92.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the contract with Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

More importantly, where disclosure of the documents reveals unlawful activities or inefficiencies, this element of the conditional exemption will not be met and the conditional exemption will not apply: FOI Guidelines, 6.115.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If the contract for services is about an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to the contract for services.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

I find it hard to believe that the contract for services would contain the personal information (e.g. signature) of persons other than Deborah Glass, being a party to the contract for services, and the person, in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, authorised to enter into the contract with Deborah Glass on behalf of the Commonwealth.

Even if section 47F applies to the authorised person and Deborah Glass, the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details. If the authorised officer who signed the contract was a senior assistant ombudsman or the Commonwealth Ombudsman or a Deputy Commonwealth Ombudsman, then there is no justification for not releasing that part of the document under the public interest test.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

PART B OF MY REQUEST

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

It is unlikely that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Even if such information were contained in the document, Clare Miller has not addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services would not be permissible.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is highly unlikely that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contain any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

Why would information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures be contained in terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services?

In any case, documents setting out methods of investigation on the part of the staff in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman are published in manuals on the Commonwealth Ombudsman's website and elsewhere – see, for example:

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to a copy of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are public information. It stands to reason that terms of reference would have been prepared in furtherance of that contract, details about which are public. Those terms of reference would reflect the purpose of the contract, details about which are public.

Clare Miller cannot merely assert that an effect will occur following disclosure. The particulars of the predicted effect should be identified during the decision-making process, including whether the effect could reasonably be expected to occur. Where the conditional exemption is relied on, the relevant particulars and reasons should form part of the decision maker’s statement of reasons: FOI Guidelines, 6.92.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

More importantly, where disclosure of the documents reveals unlawful activities or inefficiencies, this element of the conditional exemption will not be met and the conditional exemption will not apply: FOI Guidelines, 6.115.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If the terms of reference are about an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to the terms of reference.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

While it is possible that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass might contain the personal information of persons other than Deborah Glass (e.g. a member of the staff of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman), the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

PART C OF MY REQUEST

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

While possible, I think it unlikely that the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Even if such information were contained in the document, Clare Miller has not addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services would not be permissible.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is highly unlikely that the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contain any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

Why would information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures be contained in the outcome of the independent investigation and review services?

In any case, documents setting out methods of investigation on the part of the staff in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman are published in manuals on the Commonwealth Ombudsman's website and elsewhere – see, for example:

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/...

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are public information. It stands to reason that a documented record of the outcome of that contract, details about which are public, should exist. The record of the outcome would reflect the purpose of the contract, details about which are public.

Clare Miller cannot merely assert that an effect will occur following disclosure. The particulars of the predicted effect should be identified during the decision-making process, including whether the effect could reasonably be expected to occur. Where the conditional exemption is relied on, the relevant particulars and reasons should form part of the decision maker’s statement of reasons: FOI Guidelines, 6.92.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

More importantly, where disclosure of the documents reveals unlawful activities or inefficiencies, this element of the conditional exemption will not be met and the conditional exemption will not apply: FOI Guidelines, 6.115.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If there is a report of the outcome of an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to that record.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

While it is possible that a record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass might contain the personal information of persons other than Deborah Glass (e.g. a member of the staff of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman), the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

attachment.pdf

104K Download View as HTML
attachment.pdf

148K Download View as HTML

Our reference: CP25/04553

By email: [FOI #13613 email]

Thank you for contacting the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner (OAIC)

The OAIC receives a large quantity of correspondence each day and we will
be in contact as soon as we are able.

If you have contacted us to make a freedom of information (FOI) complaint

 If we are unable to assist you in relation to your complaint
issue, or require further information, we will contact you.

 You may wish to also lodge a complaint directly with the agency
that handled your freedom of information (FOI) request.

 If you are seeking access to documents, the Information
Commissioner (IC) review process would be more appropriate. If this is the
case, please make an IC review application using our [1]online webform and
withdraw your FOI complaint by emailing [2][email address].

If your contact details change, your complaint has been resolved, or if
other circumstances change, please write to us at [3][email address] and
quote CP25/04553.

Information about how we handle FOI complaints is available on our
website: [4]How we handle a freedom of information complaint.

The OAIC’s [5]service charter sets out the standard of service you can
expect from the OAIC and explains how you can assist us to help you.

Yours sincerely

Intake and Eligibility Branch

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

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. https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entityt...
2. mailto:[email address]
3. mailto:[email address]
4. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
5. https://www.oaic.gov.au/about-the-OAIC/o...

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

From: Darrin DeYoung
Sent: Saturday, 29 November 2025 3:42 PM
To: [email address] <[email address]>
Subject: IC review application

Hello
I tried to apply for IC review but the OAIC's IC review form was
malfunctioning.
I used the FOI complaint form to submit my IC review application.
The reference is WEB-CP-25-05506.
Please acknowledge receipt of my IC review application (in respect of a
decision made by the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman -
[1]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/i...)
by replying to [FOI #13613 email].
Kind regards
GIPAgoomar

References

Visible links
1. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/i...

Our reference: MR25/02498

By email: [FOI #13613 email]

Receipt of your IC review application

Thank you for your application for Information Commissioner Review (IC
review). Please note that while you have applied for IC review using
another email address, you have instructed the Office of the Australian
Information Commissioner (OAIC) to acknowledge receipt of your IC review
application by replying to the email address
‘[FOI #13613 email]’.

The [1]OAIC service charter sets out the standard of service you can
expect from the OAIC and explains how you can assist us to help you.

Information about the Information Commissioner review process is set out
in:

• [2]How we handle an IC review application.
• the [3]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 [4]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 [5]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 [6]Part 10
of the [7]FOI Guidelines.

Yours sincerely

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

Notice:

References

Visible links
1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/about-the-OAIC/o...
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
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...

image001.jpg

2K Download
image002.jpg

0K Download
image004.jpg

0K Download

Our reference: MR25/02498

Agency reference: FOI-2025-80118

GIPAgoomar

Sent by email: [1][FOI #13613 email]

Your IC review application about the Commonwealth Ombudsman

Good morning GIPAgoomar

I write to you in relation to your application for IC review of the FOI
decision made by the Commonwealth Ombudsman on 11 November 2025.

Based on the information provided in your application, it is unclear why
you are not satisfied with the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s decision of 11
November 2025.

Action required by you before 16 December 2025:

Please advise which parts of the decision of 11 November 2025, you
disagree with and why. Specifically:

• what documents you think are missing that relate to your request,
and/or
• which exemptions/redactions you disagree with

Participation in IC review process:

You are required to comply with the [2]Direction as to certain procedures
to be followed by applicants in Information Commissioner reviews. If an
applicant fails to comply with a direction of the Information
Commissioner, including the Direction as to certain procedures to be
followed by applicants in Information Commissioner reviews, the
Information Commissioner may in some cases decide not to undertake or
continue to undertake an IC review. The Direction specifically states:

• An application for IC review should:

◦ identify the parts of the decision the applicant wants the
Information Commissioner to review
◦ state why the applicant disagrees with the agency’s or minister’s
decision
◦ identify which documents the applicant considers have been wrongly
refused or which exemptions have been incorrectly applied
◦ if the FOI request has been refused on the ground that it would
substantially or unreasonably divert an agency’s resources or
interfere with the performance of a minister’s functions (ss 24 and
24AA) – specify the reasons why the applicant believes the FOI
request would not have this impact [2.16]

• Applicants must also respond to requests for information from the OAIC
within the time provided unless there are exceptional circumstances
warranting a longer period to respond. If more time is needed, a
request for an extension of time must be made to the OAIC at the
earliest opportunity within the period provided for response, and no
later than 2 days before that period is due to expire. Requests for
more time must explain the exceptional circumstances that necessitate
additional time and propose a new date for response. Approval of an
extension request is at the discretion of the OAIC [2.22]

As such, if you do not provide the information we need for the IC review
application by 16 December 2025, we intend to close your IC review
application.

Assistance

If you are unable to respond by 16 December 2025, you must request more
time at the earliest opportunity and no later than 14 December 2025.
Requests for more time must explain why you need more time, and you must
tell us when you will be able to provide a response.

Please note: You can withdraw an IC review application at any time. There
is no penalty if you do this. You can also lodge a new FOI request to the
respondent at any time.

If you require assistance regarding this email, please contact us at
[3][email address].

Please quote the reference at the top of this email in all correspondence.

Kind regards

[4][IMG] Carl English (he/him)

Assistant Director, Freedom of Information Branch

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

Sydney | GPO Box 5288 Sydney NSW 2001

1300 363 992 | [5][email address]

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.

[6]Subscribe to Information Matters

Notice:

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #13613 email]
2. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
3. mailto:[email address]
4. https://www.oaic.gov.au/
5. mailto:[email address]
6. https://www.oaic.gov.au/engage-with-us/n...

Dear Carl English,

OAIC reference: MR25/02498
Ombudsman reference: FOI-2025-80118-IR

I refer to your email of 2 December 2025, in which you noted that it as not clear why I was unsatisfied with the Commonwealth Ombudsman's decision of 11 November 2025.

I had, in the form submitted to the OAIC on 29 November 2025, identified the link to my reasons for review. The link is:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/i...

In case you have been unable to access the content associated with that link, I will copy and paste the reasons that I wrote so that you have those reasons in this email. Please let me know if yo uhave any questions about the grounds of review requested.

***---***---***---***---***

GROUNDS FOR IC REVIEW

In this post, I note my reasons for applying for IC review.

This post will be structures along the lines of my FOI request, which was submitted to the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman on 7 September 2025: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/i...

In my FOI request, I requested access to:

a) a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the provision of the independent investigation and review services; and

b) the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions, request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services; and

c) the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g. by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

PART A OF MY REQUEST

I requested a copy of the contract entered into with Deborah Glass for the provision of the independent investigation and review services.

It is not clear which of the exemptions have been applied by Clare Miller to this document in her reasons for internal review: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/1... 2025 80118 IR decision GIPAgoomar.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

For that reason, I will be forced to address each of the exemptions she has claimed.

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

It is very highly unlikely that a contract entered into with Deborah Glass by the Commonwealth Ombudsman contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Why would any information about a confidential source of information be contained in a contract for services? No reasons have been provided to support such a contention by Clare Miller. Even if such information were contained in the document, Clare Miller has not addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services would not be permissible.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is very highly unlikely that a contract entered into with Deborah Glass by the Commonwealth Ombudsman contains any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

Why would information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures be contained in a contract for independent review services?

In any case, documents setting out methods of investigation on the part of the staff in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman are published in manuals on the Commonwealth Ombudsman's website and elsewhere – see, for example:

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7295 - IAN.001.001.0082 - Work Practices Manual 2019 (A2312162).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7305 - IAN.001.001.0058 - Attachment A - Updated Monitoring Recommendations Procedure with new templates in Appendix 1 (A2312156).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7292 - IAN.001.001.0020 - Guidelines for preparing own motion and major investigation reports for publication (A234589) (A2312174).pdf

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to a copy of a contract for services entered into with Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are also public information.

Clare Miller cannot merely assert that an effect will occur following disclosure. The particulars of the predicted effect should be identified during the decision-making process, including whether the effect could reasonably be expected to occur. Where the conditional exemption is relied on, the relevant particulars and reasons should form part of the decision maker’s statement of reasons: FOI Guidelines, 6.92.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the contract with Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

More importantly, where disclosure of the documents reveals unlawful activities or inefficiencies, this element of the conditional exemption will not be met and the conditional exemption will not apply: FOI Guidelines, 6.115.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If the contract for services is about an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to the contract for services.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

I find it hard to believe that the contract for services would contain the personal information (e.g. signature) of persons other than Deborah Glass, being a party to the contract for services, and the person, in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, authorised to enter into the contract with Deborah Glass on behalf of the Commonwealth.

Even if section 47F applies to the authorised person and Deborah Glass, the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details. If the authorised officer who signed the contract was a senior assistant ombudsman or the Commonwealth Ombudsman or a Deputy Commonwealth Ombudsman, then there is no justification for not releasing that part of the document under the public interest test.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

PART B OF MY REQUEST

I requested the terms of reference (howsoever described - e.g. brief, instructions, request etc.) for the independent investigation and review services.

For that reason, I will be forced to address each of the exemptions she has claimed.

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

It is unlikely that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Even if such information were contained in the document, Clare Miller has not addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the contract for professional services would not be permissible.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is highly unlikely that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contain any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7295 - IAN.001.001.0082 - Work Practices Manual 2019 (A2312162).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7305 - IAN.001.001.0058 - Attachment A - Updated Monitoring Recommendations Procedure with new templates in Appendix 1 (A2312156).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7292 - IAN.001.001.0020 - Guidelines for preparing own motion and major investigation reports for publication (A234589) (A2312174).pdf

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to a copy of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are public information. It stands to reason that terms of reference would have been prepared in furtherance of that contract, details about which are public. Those terms of reference would reflect the purpose of the contract, details about which are public.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If the terms of reference are about an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to the terms of reference.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

While it is possible that the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass might contain the personal information of persons other than Deborah Glass (e.g. a member of the staff of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman), the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the terms of reference for the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

PART C OF MY REQUEST

I requested the outcome of the independent investigation and review services (e.g. by way of report, a statement of recommendations etc.).

For that reason, I will be forced to address each of the exemptions she has claimed.

Section 37(1)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(1)(b) applies.

While possible, I think it unlikely that the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contains any information that would disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information, or the non-existence of a confidential source of information, in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law.

Section 37(2)(b)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 37(2)(b) applies.

It is highly unlikely that the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass contain any information that would or could disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of, breaches or evasions of the law the disclosure of which would, or would be reasonably likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7295 - IAN.001.001.0082 - Work Practices Manual 2019 (A2312162).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7305 - IAN.001.001.0058 - Attachment A - Updated Monitoring Recommendations Procedure with new templates in Appendix 1 (A2312156).pdf

https://robodebt.royalcommission.gov.au/... 4-7292 - IAN.001.001.0020 - Guidelines for preparing own motion and major investigation reports for publication (A234589) (A2312174).pdf

https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/asse...

Section 47E(d)

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47E(d) applies.

I doubt that providing access to the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The fact that the contract was entered into is public information and the grounds for entering into the contract are public information. It stands to reason that a documented record of the outcome of that contract, details about which are public, should exist. The record of the outcome would reflect the purpose of the contract, details about which are public.

Clare Miller has not included any particulars of the predicted adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman should the record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass be made available under the FOI Act.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman would not have called in Deborah Glass, the former Ombudsman for the State of Victoria, to conduct independent investigation and review services unless somebody in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman had really stuffed something up. If there is a report of the outcome of an independent investigation and review of a stuff up in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, section 47E(d) has no application to that record.

Finally, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Section 47F

Clare Miller claims, in her internal review decision notice of 11 November 2025, that section 47F of the FOI Act applies to the contract for services.

While it is possible that a record of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass might contain the personal information of persons other than Deborah Glass (e.g. a member of the staff of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman), the question is whether it is in the public interest not to release those details.

In any case, in respect of the application of the public interest test and section 47F, Clare Miller has not, in her reasons, addressed how providing an edited copy, for the purposes of section 22 of the FOI Act, of the outcome of the independent investigation and review services conducted by Deborah Glass would be impermissible.

Yours sincerely,

GIPAgoomar

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are GIPAgoomar please sign in and let everyone know.

1 follower

Right to Know

Independent investigations and review - Deborah Glass

1 Attachment

2 Attachments

1 Attachment

1 Attachment

2 Attachments

GIPAgoomar left an annotation (November 28, 2025)

2 Attachments

3 Attachments

Want to know something?

Act on what you've learnt

Requests like this

Request for documents on the ART FOI Disclosure Log

Commissioner briefs for senate estimates November 2024

FOI Request: Sydney Consolidation Project - Eveleigh Precinct Closure

AAT Disclosure Log - access to documents

Woomera (Hangar 5) Documents and Reports: ARPANSA Disclosure Log

Disclosure Log: Koala Numbers, Sterilisation & Culling Programs in South Australia 2018-19

Guidance for NDIA staff

Department's Question Time Briefs for 4 July 2024

TPP and Related Documents (IP Australia)

Independent review and inquiry services provided by Emeritus Professor John McMillan

Right to Know