2 January 2025
FOI 3750
Mr Harold Kitch
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST – CHARGE DECISION
I am writing to notify you of my decision in response to your contention on 31 December 2024
of the Treasury’s charge of $309.33, notified on 19 November 2024, to process your request of
28 September 2024 for access, under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act), to the
following:
Emails and notes from officials regarding Armaguard. I request the emails and notes as
taken by Treasury staff who travel ed with the Australian Banking Association and the
RBA on their trip with McKinsey consultants.
Your contention was made outside the permitted 30-day period after the date of the notice in
which to contend the charge. However, pursuant to section 29(1)(f) of the FOI Act, I have
decided to extend time for your contention to 31 December 2024.
Your submissions
On 20 November 2024, you responded to the charge notice as fol ows:
The objects of the FOI Act provide the basis for the fol owing principles relevant to
charges under the FOI Act:

A charge must not be used to unnecessarily delay access or to discourage an applicant
from exercising the right of access conferred by the FOI Act.

A charge should fairly reﬂect the work involved in providing access to documents.

Charges are discretionary and should be justiﬁed on a case-by-case basis.

Agencies should encourage administrative access at no charge, where appropriate.

Agencies should assist applicants to frame FOI requests (s 15(3) of the FOI Act).

Agencies should draw an applicant’s attention to opportunities to obtain free access to
a document or information outside the FOI Act (s 3A(2)(b)).

A decision to impose a charge should be transparent.

Langton Crescent
Parkes ACT 2600
Australia
P: +61 2 6263 2800

It is clear that you are attempting to deliberately delay and discourage access to these
documents through imposing absurd fees. Please advise of the appeals process.

I wil  be writing to Senators who are interested in this topic, drawing their attention to
this cover up.

As your email queried the process for contending a charge, I did not interpret this
correspondence as a conten�on of the charge itself. Accordingly, on the same day, you were
advised of the charge conten�on process.

On 31 December 2024, you made the fol owing further submissions in support of your charge
conten�on:

I am writing to request an internal review of Department of the Treasury's handling of
my FOI request 'Emails and notes from oﬃcials regarding Armaguard'.

Treasury is deliberately trying to obscure reasonable access to a very small sample of
documents which determine how cash is used in this country. It eﬀects al  Australians,
and it is reasonable to understand what Treasury oﬃcials said on taxpayer funded
international journeys.

If this request is denied again by way of imposing unreasonable fees, I wil  be making
representations to Malcolm Roberts, Andrew Bragg and John Adams. All of whom wil
be very interested in why Treasury has chosen to very selectively deny this request via
introducing needless fees.

I am an authorised decision maker under section 23 of the FOI Act.
Decision
Having reviewed your various submissions in support of your charge contention, I have
decided to waive the charge in full on public interest grounds. The Treasury will accordingly
recommence processing your request.
Right of review
A statement setting out your review rights regarding my decision is attached.
Yours sincerely,

Tim Baird
Assistant Secretary
Financial System Division

2

INFORMATION ON RIGHTS OF REVIEW
1.
APPLICATION FOR INTERNAL REVIEW OF DECISION
Section 54 of the Freedom of Information Act gives you the right to apply for an internal
review of the decision refusing to grant access to documents in accordance with your request.
An application for a review of the decision must be made in writing within 30 days of receipt of
this letter.
No particular form is required but it would assist the decision-maker if you could set out in the
application the grounds on which you consider that the decision should be reviewed.
An application for a review of the decision should be emailed to xxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.
OR
2.
APPLICATION TO AUSTRALIAN INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (INFORMATION
COMMISSIONER) FOR REVIEW OF DECISION
Section 54L of the FOI Act gives you the right to seek a review of the decision from the
Information Commissioner. An application for review must be made within 60 days of
receiving the decision.
An application for review must be in writing and must:
–  give details of how notices must be sent to you; and
–  include a copy of the notice of decision.
You should send your application for review to:
The Information Commissioner
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW  2001
AND/OR
3.
COMPLAINTS TO THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Section 70 of the FOI Act provides that a person may complain to the Information
Commissioner about action taken by an agency in the exercise of powers or the performance
of functions under the FOI Act.
A complaint to the Information Commissioner must be in writing and identify the agency the
complaint is about. It should be directed to the fol owing address:
The Information Commissioner
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW  2001
The Information Commissioner may decline to investigate the complaint in a number of
circumstances, including that you did not exercise your right to ask the agency, the
Information Commissioner, a court or tribunal to review the decision.
3

Document Outline