Dear Commonwealth Ombudsman,

I refer to this application made of the Commonwealth Ombudsman under the FOI Act: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...

The application raises serious allegations and provides supporting evidence that the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman covered up serious corruption engaged in by senior Liberal Party and/or Institute of Public Affairs members:

- former Public Service Commissioner, John Lloyd; and
- former Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Phil Gaetjens;

on behalf of the Liberal Party and right wing pederast group, the Institute of Public Affairs.

The application also suggests that the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman covered up the heinous illegality of the former Government’s hideous ‘Robodebt’ program.

I’m not aware of the corruption engaged in by Phil Gaetjens, but only the most partisan, amoral and unprincipled public servant would have sought to cover up the monstrous corruption engaged in by John Lloyd and that of those Liberal Party members responsible for the implementation of the unfettered evil that was the ‘Robodebt’ program.

That the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman has endeavoured to cover up that corruption on behalf of its Liberal Party colleagues warrants the institution of a Senate inquiy, or otherwise a Royal Commission.

That aside, I note that the applicant sought internal review of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s decision on his/her FOI application here: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...

Though as best as I can tell, the Commonwealth Ombudsman failed to make an internal review decision on that application in apparent contravention of s.54C(3) of the FOI Act and therefore ss.13(1) and 13(4) of the Public Service Act 1999.

Under the FOI Act, I seek a copy of any internal review decision made by anyone at the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman in response to the application for internal review set out here: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...

In making this request I note that the Commonwealth Ombudsman has statutory functions and powers under the FOI Act in respect of investigating complaints about compliance with the FOI Act. If it’s the case that the Commonwealth Ombudsman is unable or unwilling to take steps to ensure her office complies with the FOI Act then it seems reasonable to conclude that she’s not a fit and proper person to be the Commonwealth Ombudsman, hold any statutory office whatsoever or be a member of the Australian Public Service.

In making this request, I note that paragraph 6.19 of the FOI Guidelines made under s.93A of the FOI Act provides that release of the documents the subject of my request will be in the public interest because, if they don’t exist, that outcome will “inform debate on a matter of public importance” – specifically, that the Commonwealth Ombudsman “has engaged in misconduct or negligent, improper or unlawful conduct”.

Yours faithfully,

Tong Maguire

Dear Commonwealth Ombudsman,

I refer to my request made under the FOI Act of the Commonwealth Ombudsman on 26 June 2022 and titled “The Commonwealth Ombudsman is corrupt?”

Paragraph 15(5)(b) of the FOI Act states that on receiving a request under the FOI Act, an agency “must as soon as practicable but in any case not later than 14 days after the day on which the request is received by or on behalf of the agency … take all reasonable steps to enable the applicant to be notified that the request has been received.”

For whatever reason, Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman staff couldn’t find it within themselves to acknowledge receipt of my request, as required by law. I further note that subsection 13(4) of the Public Service Act requires public servants to comply with all Australian law, including the FOI Act.

Failure to comply with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 is, of course, the mating call of the corrupt public servant. In that regard I note that Penny McKay is acting Commonwealth Ombudsman and agency head and is ultimately responsible for the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s compliance with the law. By virtue of the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s repeated contraventions of the FOI Act, there are serious questions to be answered in respect of Ms McKay’s integrity, independence, competence and fitness for public office.

That being so, under the FOI Act, I request access to:
- any email dated in the inclusive date range of 1 July 2021 – to the date of this FOI application; and
- that contains the word "Gaetjens" (be it in the subject line, the body of an email or in the addressee field of an email); and
- that is contained within the email accounts of any of the following Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman officers:
i) Penny Mackay;
ii) Lisa Collett;
iii) Sine Dellit;
iv) Gregory Parkhurst.

Relevant documents can be quickly identified by searching “All Outlook Items” in each of those officers’ email clients for the term “Gaetjens”.

Noting paragraphs 6.153 and 6.154 of the FOI Guidelines issued by the Information Commissioner in accordance with s.93A of the FOI Act, I consent to the redaction, from any relevant document, of the personal information of any person other than those who are or were an APS employee, a statutory officer or a Member of Parliament.

I can provide extensive submissions as to the wide public interest in the documents the subject of my request including by reference to unlawful conduct engaged in by Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman staff in pursuit of the political interests of the previous Government.

Yours faithfully,

Tong Maguire

Thank you for the update.

In the flurry of staff movement at your office over recent months I've managed to obtain access to four documents that are within the scope of my request. I'm advised there are a number of other documents held by your office that fall within the terms of my request and so I look forward to receiving those documents too, by the end of this week, as promised.

Yours sincerely,

Tong Maguire