OFFICIAL

Freedom of Information (FOI) request
Notice of Decision
Reference: FOI/2024/417
Tyler
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx

Dear Tyler,
I refer to your request dated 29 December 2024 to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
(the Department), 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.
Scope of request
You set out your request in the fol owing terms:
Is it possible to provide the following, with necessary redactions and omissions, about the
Letters Patent relating to the Governor-General in 2008
...
1. A copy of the correspondence sent from Australian Government to the Late Majesty
the Queen (or private secretary etc. etc.), sending the draft Letters Patent Relating to the
Office of Governor General of the Commonwealth of Australia, for the Majesty's
approval or signature etc. etc.

2. A copy of the correspondence sent from the Late Majesty the Queen (or private
secretary etc. etc.) to Australian Government, on the Letters Patent approved or signed
etc. etc. by the Late Majesty the Queen.
Authorised decision-maker
I am authorised to make this decision in accordance with arrangements approved by the
Department’s Secretary under section 23 of the FOI Act.
Postal Address: PO Box 6500, CANBERRA ACT 2600
Telephone: +61 2 6271 5849 Fax: +61 2 6271 5776 www.pmc.gov.au ABN: 18 108 001 191

1

link to page 2 link to page 2 OFFICIAL
Material taken into account
In reaching my decision I referred to the fol owing:
•  the terms of your request
•  searches undertaken by the Department
•  the documents relevant to your request
•  the FOI Act
•  the Guidelines issued by the Information Commissioner1 (the Guidelines)
Documents in scope of request
The Department has identified 3 documents that fal  within the scope of your request.
Document 3 is publicly accessible at Federal Register of Legislation - Office of Governor-General of
the Commonwealth of Australia2
The documents are set out in the Schedule of Documents at Attachment A.
Decision
I have decided to grant access in ful  to document 1, with irrelevant material deleted.
I have decided to refuse access to document 2 on the basis that it is exempt under section 33 of the
FOI Act (Documents affecting national security, defence or international relations).
I have decided to grant access to document 3 by means of providing you with a link to where the
document is published. Please see the link provided above under ‘Documents in scope of request’.
Reason for decision
My findings of fact and reasons for deciding that certain information is exempt or irrelevant is set out
below.
1.  Section 33 – Documents affecting national security, defence or international relations
Section 33(a)(i i) of the FOI Act provides:
A document is an exempt document if disclosure of the document under this Act:
(a) would, or could reasonably be expected to, cause damage to:
(i) The security of the Commonwealth;

1 Section 93A of the FOI Act
2 https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2019Q00001/asmade/text
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
2

link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 OFFICIAL
(i ) The defence of the Commonwealth; or
(iii) the international relations of the Commonwealth

The Guidelines explain the fol owing with respect to the application an exemption:
The test ‘would or could reasonably be expected’ … requires a decision maker to assess
the likelihood of the predicted or forecast event, effect or damage occurring after
disclosure of a document.
The use of the word ‘could’ in this qualification is less stringent than ‘would’ and requires
analysis of the reasonable expectation rather than certainty of an event, effect or
damage occurring.3
the phrase ‘international relations’, means the ability of the Australian Government to
maintain good working relations with other governments and international
organisations and to protect the flow of confidential information between them.4
‘Damage’ for the purpose of this exemption is not confined to monetary or physical loss
or damage, but may be intangible.5
Considering this, and the nature of the document, including long standing protocols for the
engagement between the Palace and the Australian Government, I find the possibility for the
disclosure may diminish the confidence which another country would have in Australia as a reliable
recipient of its confidential information, making that country or its agencies less wil ing to cooperate
with Australian agencies in the future.6
Noting the circumstances of the document, the Guidelines relevantly address the application of the
section 33:
… the AAT has accepted evidence of a long-standing convention and practice of
confidentiality with respect to correspondence between the Australian Government and
the Queen [the confidentiality convention]. This convention preserves the effective
functioning of the relationship between the Commonwealth of Australia and the
Monarch, including relations with the Queen personally and members of the Royal
Household, including the Queen’s private secretary. In these circumstances, the AAT

3 Paragraphs 5.15 – 5.18 of the Guidelines
4 Paragraph 5.39 of the Guidelines
5 Paragraph 5.25 of the Guidelines
6 Paragraph 5.42 of the Guidelines
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
3

link to page 4 link to page 4 OFFICIAL
found that disclosure of letters between Australian Prime Ministers and the Queen could
reasonably be expected to damage the international relations of the Commonwealth.7
Further, I have had regard to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision in Secretary, Department of
Prime Minister and Cabinet and Summers (Freedom of information),8 in particular:
•  The expectation on the part of the Monarch and the Royal Household that the confidentiality
convention wil  be strictly observed;
•  Disclosure would breach the confidentiality convention and be viewed as such; and
•  Damage which could reasonably be expected to flow from disclosure of the Letters for
Australia’s relationship with the Monarch and Royal Household.
The Department has consulted Royal Household officials at Buckingham Palace regarding the
information in document 2 and they confirmed their position has not changed.
For the reasons given above, I am satisfied document 2 contains information that would reasonably
be expected to cause damage to the international relations of the Commonwealth.
Document 2 is, therefore, found to be exempt in ful  under section 33(a)(iii) of the FOI Act.
2.  Deletion of irrelevant matter
Section 22 of the FOI Act authorises the Department to give access to an edited copy of a document
if giving access to a document would disclose information that would be reasonably regarded as
irrelevant to the request, and it is possible for the Department to prepare an edited copy, modified by
deletions, ensuring that the edited copy would not disclose any information that would reasonably be
regarded as irrelevant to the request.
On 2 January 2025, the Department advised you of its policy to exclude the personal and direct
contact details of officers not in the Senior Executive Service (SES) and any Ministerial staff, as well as
any person’s signature, and the mobile or direct numbers of SES officers, which are contained in
documents that fal  within the terms of an FOI request. This category of information is identified as
irrelevant and documents can be modified by the Department to delete the irrelevant material.
Accordingly I am satisfied that part of the document 1 is irrelevant under section 22(1)(a)(i ) of the FOI
Act. The remaining parts of the document has been released to you as it is relevant to your request.
Review rights
If you disagree with my decision, you may apply for internal review or Information Commissioner
review of the decision.

7 Paragraph 5.41 of the Guidelines
8 https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/AATA/2019/5537.html
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
4

link to page 5 link to page 5

OFFICIAL
Internal review
Under section 54 of the FOI Act, you may apply in writing to the Department for an internal review of
my decision. The internal review application must be made within 30 days after the date of this letter,
please attach the reasons why you disagree with the decision.
Applications for review should be sent to xxx@xxx.xxx.xx.
Information Commissioner review
Under section 54L of the FOI Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to
review my decision. An application for review by the Information Commissioner must be made in
writing within 60 days after the date of this letter. You can apply using the OAIC Web Form.9
FOI Complaints
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your FOI request, please let us know what we could
have done better. We may be able to rectify the problem. If you are not satisfied with our response,
you can make a complaint to the Australian Information Commissioner. A complaint to the
Information Commissioner must be made in writing. You can make a complaint using the
OAIC Web Form.10
If you wish to discuss any aspect of your requests, you can contact the FOI Section by email at
xxx@xxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely,
David Belgrove
Assistant Secretary
Parliamentary and Government Branch
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
19 March 2025
9 https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=ICReview&layoutcode=ICReviewWF
10 https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=Complaint&layoutcode=FOIComplaintWF
OFFICIAL
PM&C | Freedom of Information (FOI) request
5

Document Outline