fa 241200950 decision record.PDF.pdf

18 February 2025
Noseyrosey
BY EMAIL:  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
In reply please quote:
FOI Request:
FA 24/12/00950
File Number:
FA24/12/00950
Dear Noseyrosey,
Freedom of Information (FOI) request – Decision
On 14 December 2024, the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) received a request for
access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision on your request for access under the
FOI Act.
1
Scope of request
You have requested access to the following documents:
Revised Scope 30 December 2024
To address the department’s concerns and assist in processing, I propose the following
refined scope:

Documents Sought
1. Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) related to data sharing between the Department
of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) and the Department of Home Affairs.

2. Policies, procedures, guidelines, or frameworks governing how the Department of
Home Affairs requests, obtains, stores, handles, or uses DVA client information. This
includes documents detailing criteria for approving access, consent or authorization
processes, security controls, and retention or destruction policies.

3. Privacy impact assessments related to the receipt, storage, or handling of DVA client
information.

Timeframe
From 1 January 2014 to 14 December 2024.

6 Chan Street Belconnen ACT 2617
PO Box 25 Belconnen ACT 2616 • www.homeaffairs.gov.au

Exclusions
To streamline processing, I exclude individual complaint files or other case-specific
records involving veterans.

Clarification of Purpose
The purpose of my request is to understand if and how the Department of Home Affairs
engages with DVA in systematic or formal data-sharing arrangements and the
governance structures supporting these activities. This inquiry does not pertain to
individual-level interactions or isolated cases but focuses on high-level agreements,
policies, and procedures.

Next Steps
I trust this refinement resolves the practical refusal concerns and enables the department
to proceed with processing the request. Please confirm if this revised scope is acceptable
or if further adjustments are necessary.
2
Authority to make decision
I am an officer authorised under section 23 of the FOI Act to make decisions in respect of
requests to access documents or to amend or annotate records.
3
Relevant material
In reaching my decision I referred to the following:
•  the terms of your request
•  the documents relevant to the request
•  the FOI Act
•  Guidelines published by the Office of the Information Commissioner under section 93A
of the FOI Act (the FOI Guidelines)
•  advice from Departmental officers with responsibility for matters relating to the
documents to which you sought access
•  advice from other Commonwealth Departments
4
Documents in scope of request
The Department has identified two documents as falling within Part 1 of the scope of your request.
These documents were in the possession of the Department on 14 December 2024 when your
request was received.
Attachment A is a schedule which describes the relevant documents and sets out my decision
in relation to each of them.
The Department has undertaken reasonable searches for documents within Parts 2 and 3 of the
scope of your request.
In summary, the searches undertaken by the relevant business areas in relation to your request
included:
•  Legal - Privacy, FOI and Records Management
•  Policy Procedure Control Framework
•  ABF Operational Coordination and Planning
•  ABF Operational Systems Management
•  ABF Legislation Coordination
- 2 -

•  Immigration and Citizenship Services
•  Digital Delivery
The Department does not hold an existing discrete documents that are specific to Department of
Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) as reflected in Parts 2 and 3 of your request. Further, all files regarding
Document Verification Services have been permanently transferred under Machinery of
Government to the Attorney-General’s Department (AGD).
The Department has considered whether it can extract the data in accordance with section 17(1)
of the FOI Act.
The obligation for retrieving or collating information stored in a computer system arises if:
•  the Department could produce a written document containing the information using a
computer or other equipment that is ordinarily available to the agency for retrieving or
collating stored information, and
•  producing a written document would not substantially and unreasonably divert the
resources of the agency from its other operations (s17(2))
In Collection Point Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation the full bench of the Federal Court decided
that if a new computer program is required to be written to produce the document then a computer
is not being used in a manner that is ordinarily available to the agency because an extraordinary
step is required to be taken1.
I am satisfied that the Department is not able to produce a written document containing the
information you seek in a discrete form using a computer or other equipment ordinarily available
to it.
Having regard to your request and the types of documents that may fall within the scope of your
request I am satisfied that the searches conducted were extremely thorough and all reasonable
steps have been taken to locate any document relevant to your request.
5
Decision
The decision in relation to the documents in the possession of the Department which fall within
the scope of your request is as follows:
•  Release two documents in part with deletions regarding Part 1 of your scope
•  Refuse Parts 2 and 3 of your scope as documents do not exist, as they were
transferred to the AGD
6
Reasons for Decision
Where the schedule of documents indicates an exemption claim has been applied to a document
or part of document, my findings of fact and reasons for deciding that the exemption provision
applies to that information are set out below.


1 Collection Point Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCAFC 67 [20].
- 3 -

6.1  Section 22 of the FOI Act – irrelevant to request
Section 22 of the FOI Act provides that if giving access to a document would disclose information
that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the request, it is possible for the Department
to prepare an edited copy of the document, modified by deletions, ensuring that the edited copy
would not disclose any information that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the
request.
On 18 December 2024, the Department advised you that its policy is to exclude the personal
details of officers not in the Senior Executive Service (SES),  as well as the mobile and work
telephone numbers of SES staff and non-public facing email addresses, contained in documents
that fall within scope of an FOI request.
I have decided that parts of documents marked ‘s22(1)(a)(ii)’ would disclose information that
could reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to your request. I have prepared an edited copy of
the documents, with the irrelevant material deleted pursuant to section 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act.
The remainder of the documents have been considered for release to you as they are relevant
to your request.
6.2  Section 24A of the FOI Act – Requests may be refused if documents cannot be
found, do not exist or have not been received
Section 24A of the FOI Act provides that the Department may refuse a request for access to a
document if all reasonable steps have been taken to find the document and the Department is
satisfied that the document does not exist.
I am satisfied that the Department has undertaken reasonable searches in relation to Parts 2 and
3 of your  request and that no documents were in the possession of the Department on 14
December 2024 when your FOI request was received. As such, I am refusing your request based
on the application of section 24A of the FOI Act.

6.3  Section 47D of the FOI Act – Financial or property interests

Section 47 provides that a document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act
would have a substantial adverse effect on the financial or property interests of the
Commonwealth, of Norfolk Island or of an agency.

The parts of the document redacted and marked ‘s47D’ relate to the commercial activities of
the Department. The release of this material would have a substantial adverse effect on the
financial or property interests of the Commonwealth, and I therefore find that they are
exempted under section 47D of the FOI Act.

Having formed the view that the release of the documents would have a substantial adverse
effect on the financial or property interests of the Commonwealth, I have considered whether
release of the documents would be contrary to the public interest, below.
6.4  Section 47E of the FOI Act – Operations of Agencies
Section  47E(d) of the FOI Act provides that documents are conditionally exempt if disclosure
would, or could reasonably be expected to, have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and
efficient conduct of the operations of an agency.
- 4 -

I consider that the disclosure of the parts of documents marked ‘s47E(d)’  would, or could
reasonably be expected to, have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct
of the operations of the DVA and AGD.
Managing the security and integrity of Australia's residents’ identities is integral to the operations
of the Government. Any prejudice to the effectiveness of the operational methods and procedures
used in undertaking that role would result in a substantial adverse effect on the operations of the
Government or more specifically the DVA and AGD.
Any disclosure resulting in the prejudice of the effectiveness of the Department’s operational
methods and procedures would result in the need for this Department, and potentially its law
enforcement partners, to change those methods and procedures to avoid jeopardising their future
effectiveness.
I have decided that parts of the documents are conditionally exempt under section 47E(d) of the
FOI Act. Access to a conditionally exempt document must generally be given unless it would be
contrary to the public interest  to do so.  I have turned my mind to whether disclosure of the
information would be contrary to the public interest, and have included my reasoning in that
regard below.
6.5  The public interest – section 11A of the FOI Act
As I have decided that parts of the documents are conditionally exempt, I am now required to
consider whether access to the conditionally exempt information would be contrary to the public
interest (section 11A of the FOI Act).
A part of a document which is conditionally exempt must also meet the public interest test in
section 11A(5) before an exemption may be claimed in respect of that part.
In summary, the test is whether access to the conditionally exempt part of the document would
be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
In applying this test, I have noted the objects of the FOI Act and the importance of the other
factors listed in section 11B(3) of the FOI Act, being whether access to the document would do
any of the following:
(a)  promote the objects of this Act (including all the matters set out in sections 3 and 3A)
(b)  inform debate on a matter of public importance
(c)  promote effective oversight of public expenditure
(d)  allow a person to access his or her own personal information.
Having regard to the above I am satisfied that:
•  Access to the documents would promote the objects of the FOI Act.
•  The subject matter of the documents  may  have a general characteristic of public
importance.
•  No insights into public expenditure will be provided through examination of the
documents.
•  You do not require access to the documents in order to access your own personal
information.
- 5 -

I have also considered the following factors that weigh against the release of the conditionally
exempt information in the documents:

•  Disclosure of the parts of the documents that are conditionally exempt under section
47D  of the FOI Act could reasonably be expected to prejudice the competitive
commercial activities of the Department. Disclosure would provide an unfair advantage
in relation to lawful tender process, affecting  the Department’s ability to use public
money effectively.
•  Disclosure of the parts of the documents that are conditionally exempt under section
47E(d) of the FOI Act could reasonably be expected to prejudice law enforcement
functions and, as a result, the ability of the Government to protect Australian residents’
identities. I consider there to be a strong public interest in ensuring that the ability of
the  Government  to  verify and protect Australian residents’ identities  is not
compromised or prejudiced in any way. I consider that this would be contrary to the
public interest and that this factor weighs strongly against disclosure.
I have also had regard to section 11B(4) which sets out the factors which are irrelevant to my
decision, which are:
a)  access to the document could result in embarrassment to the Commonwealth
Government, or cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government
b)  access to the document could result in any person misinterpreting or misunderstanding
the document
c)  the author of  the document was (or is) of high seniority in the agency to which the
request for access to the document was made
d)  access to the document could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
I have not taken into account any of those factors in this decision.
Upon balancing all of the above relevant public interest considerations, I have concluded that the
disclosure of the conditionally exempt information in the documents would be contrary to the
public interest and it is therefore exempt from disclosure under the FOI Act.
7
Legislation
A copy of the FOI Act is available at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A02562. If you
are unable to access the legislation through this website, please contact our office for a copy.
8
Your review rights
Internal review
You do not have the right to seek an internal review of this decision. This is because section
54E(b) of the FOI Act provides that, when an agency is deemed to have refused an FOI request
under section 15AC of the FOI Act, the applicant does not have the right to seek an internal
review of the deemed decision.
The Department was deemed to have refused your request under section 15AC of the FOI Act
because it did not make this decision within the statutory timeframes for the request.
- 6 -

While the Department has now made a substantive decision on your request, section 15AC of
the FOI Act continues to apply to your request, which means that any request you make for
internal review will be invalid.
Information Commissioner review
You can instead request the Australian Information Commissioner to review this decision. If you
want to request an Information Commissioner review, you must make your request to the Office
of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) within 60 days of being notified of this
decision.
You can apply for an Information Commissioner review at: Information Commissioner review
application form on the OAIC website.
If you have already applied for an Information Commissioner review, there is no need to make a
new review request. The OAIC will contact you shortly to give you an opportunity to advise
whether you wish the review to continue, and to provide your reasons for continuing the review.
You can find more information about Information Commissioner reviews on the OAIC website.
9
Making a complaint

You may make a complaint to the Australian Information Commissioner if you have concerns
about how the Department has handled your request under the FOI Act. This is a separate
process to the process of requesting a review of the decision as indicated above.

You can make an FOI complaint to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) at: FOI Complaint Form on the OAIC website.
10
Contacting the FOI Section
Should you wish to discuss this decision, please do not hesitate to contact the FOI Section at
xxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.

Yours sincerely,

Electronically signed

Kerry
Position number 60107817
Authorised Decision Maker
Department of Home Affairs

- 7 -