The Commonwealth Ombudsman, Prof. John McMillan, today released a report on the handling of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests in Australian Government agencies.

The Ombudsman’s investigation into the administration of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 in government departments and agencies was initiated in the interests of focusing attention on good practice as well as areas requiring improvement. The investigation looked at timeliness and consistency and quality of decision making in relation to FOI requests.

Prof. McMillan said his investigation found that there is an uneven culture of support for FOI among Australian Government agencies. ‘Some agencies are displaying a clear commitment to FOI, and are supportive of the Act’s objective of extending as far as possible the right of the Australian community to access information in the government’s possession.’

‘Other agencies do not as firmly demonstrate such a commitment’, said Prof. McMillan. ‘Deficiencies include excessive delays in the processing of some FOI requests, lack of consistency in acknowledging FOI requests in a timely manner, delay in notifying charges and inconsistencies in their application, and variable quality in the standard of decision letters, particularly regarding the explanation of exemptions imposed.’

The Ombudsman’s report recommends that agency heads issue a clear statement to staff expressing a commitment to sound FOI practice and the goals of the FOI Act, having regard to the kinds of good and bad practice identified in the report.

‘The investigation supports the view that the FOI Act works well in facilitating public access to personal information, but not so well in providing access to policy-related information’, Prof. McMillan stated.

‘The Australian Law Reform Commission, the Administrative Review Council, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee have revealed similar findings in previous reports’, said Prof. McMillan.

At present, there is no single or authoritative source of advocacy for good FOI practice. There is now consensus among the ALRC, ARC, Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee that many of the shortcomings in the current operation and effectiveness of the Act could be addressed with the establishment of a constant, independent monitor. A statutory FOI Commissioner would publicise the legislation’s existence, monitor compliance with its provisions and promote its effective operation.

The report is available at www.ombudsman.gov.au.

Date of release: 14 March 2006

Skip to main content
    0 results available.
      0 results available.
      language assistant menu topper outer language assistant menu topper inner

      Read documents in your language

      If you need more translations, please contact us via: 1300 362 072 or ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au

      The Commonwealth Ombudsman, Prof. John McMillan, today released a report on the handling of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests in Australian Government agencies.

      The Ombudsman’s investigation into the administration of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 in government departments and agencies was initiated in the interests of focusing attention on good practice as well as areas requiring improvement. The investigation looked at timeliness and consistency and quality of decision making in relation to FOI requests.

      Prof. McMillan said his investigation found that there is an uneven culture of support for FOI among Australian Government agencies. ‘Some agencies are displaying a clear commitment to FOI, and are supportive of the Act’s objective of extending as far as possible the right of the Australian community to access information in the government’s possession.’

      ‘Other agencies do not as firmly demonstrate such a commitment’, said Prof. McMillan. ‘Deficiencies include excessive delays in the processing of some FOI requests, lack of consistency in acknowledging FOI requests in a timely manner, delay in notifying charges and inconsistencies in their application, and variable quality in the standard of decision letters, particularly regarding the explanation of exemptions imposed.’

      The Ombudsman’s report recommends that agency heads issue a clear statement to staff expressing a commitment to sound FOI practice and the goals of the FOI Act, having regard to the kinds of good and bad practice identified in the report.

      ‘The investigation supports the view that the FOI Act works well in facilitating public access to personal information, but not so well in providing access to policy-related information’, Prof. McMillan stated.

      ‘The Australian Law Reform Commission, the Administrative Review Council, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee have revealed similar findings in previous reports’, said Prof. McMillan.

      At present, there is no single or authoritative source of advocacy for good FOI practice. There is now consensus among the ALRC, ARC, Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee that many of the shortcomings in the current operation and effectiveness of the Act could be addressed with the establishment of a constant, independent monitor. A statutory FOI Commissioner would publicise the legislation’s existence, monitor compliance with its provisions and promote its effective operation.

      The report is available at www.ombudsman.gov.au.

      Date of release: 14 March 2006