FOI file decoys. What’s the scam when you search for ‘FOI reform’?
Even before the government introduced the so-called ‘FOI Reforms’, there are many misconceptions. Rex Patrick confused.
On 28 June 1994 the late independent senator Brian Harradine successfully moved a motion in the Senate ordering ministers to table lists of files produced by Commonwealth Departments. The proposal was accepted. On 30 May 1996, the instructions were updated to apply to Agencies as well as Departments.
The order remained valid. So today you will find file lists of newly created files on every Government Department and Agency website.
For example here is a link Prime Ministry and Cabinet File List (but enter a department/agency name along with “Harradine order” or “Senate order” into your search engine and you will find a list of that department/agency).
The purpose of the order was indeed to make the Freedom of Information regime more enforceable; ensuring that parliamentarians, the media and the public have an idea of what information is available and target FOI access applications accordingly.
I admit that those who know and use the ‘Harradine cult’ file list are mainly transparency enthusiasts like me. It had some liability consequences.
So what is fraud?
On Friday, almost simultaneously, I received two responses to “Harradine order” FOI requests, one from PM&C and the other from the Australian Submarine Agency.
The PM&C FOI application concerned a file called “FOI Reform”. I first requested the file in March 2023, but in April 2023 I was told that “no documents were identified in this file.” Too early, I thought. But when the FOI Amendment Bill was introduced to Parliament in September, I thought I would now see what was on file. I was stunned by the response.
information
Sorry – rejected – still no documentation.
“The file is a digital folder that does not contain any documents. It also never contained any documents, consistent with the department’s response to your similar request…”
The Australian Submarine Agency FOI application concerned a file called “South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty Act 1986”. The title caught my attention.
information
Sorry – rejected – no documentation.
The only explanation was:
The ASA file identified within the scope of the applicant was the subject of reasonable steps taken to locate existing content. No records found.
Therefore, it can be concluded that indexed file lists have become distractions of FOIs rather than aids to FOIs.
In response to the zero returns, I made new requests for similar information not included in these blank files. What inefficiency!
This is truly bureaucratic nonsense worthy of an episode of “Yes Minister”.
So when Prime Minister Albanese stands up and says FOI is expensive, we can all fight back – stop authorities asking every man, woman and dog to contribute to the FOI decision, stop recklessly spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on privacy fights and stop publishing the names of empty files that waste the time of FOI applicants and authorities.
Legal costs of Snowy 2.0 snowball – more public money spent to silence more public information
Rex Patrick is a former South Australian Senator and formerly a submariner in the armed forces. Known as an anti-corruption and transparency warrior, Rex is also known as “Transparency Warrior“
