BP48703118
DEFENCE FOI 744/24/25
STATEMENT OF REASONS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
1.
I refer to the request by D Ray (the applicant), dated and received on 08 March 2025 by the
Department of Defence (Defence), for access to the following documents under the
Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (Cth) (FOI Act):
-
Budget and expenditure (including, but not limited to, all associated travel,
accommodation, consultancy expenditure, disbursements) relating to the
development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult
Learning Continuum Review (ALCR).
-
Communication between Cadet Branch Air Force, National Headquarters
AAFC, and Wing OCs, Wing XOs, and Squadron COs relating to the
development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult
Learning Continuum Review (ALCR).
-
Additional correspondence that includes the following personnel: Chief of Air
Force, Deputy Chief of Air Force, DGCADETS-AF, CDR-AAFC, Staff Officer
Learning Systems, KPMG Engagement Partner, KPMG Director, KPMG
Associate Director, KPMG Manager relating to the development of the Cadet
Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult Learning Continuum Review
(ALCR).
Background
2.
On 8 March 2025, the applicant submitted a request under the FOI Act to Defence in the
following terms:
…any correspondence, including briefs, emails, digital communications and other documents
from the Department of Defence, Royal Australian Air Force, National Headquarters
Australian Air Force Cadets (AAFC), Cadet Branch Air Force, and KPMG relating to the
development of the Cadet Learning Continuum Review (CLCR) and the Adult Learning
Continuum Review (ALCR). Specifically, I want information related to:
-
Budget and expenditure (including, but not limited to, all associated travel,
accommodation, consultancy expenditure, disbursements)
-
Decision making
-
Stakeholder consultations
-
Selection of the "think tank" and other groups, committees, and forums involved
in the development of the CLCR and ALCR
-
Communication between Cadet Branch Air Force, National Headquarters
AAFC, and Wing OCs, Wing XOs, and Squadron COs
-
Additional correspondence that includes the following personnel: Chief of Air
Force, Deputy Chief of Air Force, DGCADETS-AF, CDR-AAFC, Staff Officer
2
Learning Systems, KPMG Engagement Partner, KPMG Director, KPMG
Associate Director, KPMG Manager.
Please do not include duplicates, or publicly available documents and transcripts.
3.
On 19 March 2025, Defence formally consulted with the applicant in accordance with section
24AB of the FOI Act. The notice provided to the applicant included a statement outlining
Defence’s intention to refuse the request on the grounds that that a practical refusal reason
existed in relation to it.
4.
On 30 March 2025, the applicant revised the scope of the request to the terms outlined in
paragraph 1.
FOI decision maker
5.
I am the authorised officer pursuant to section 23 of the FOI Act to make a decision on this FOI
request.
Decision
6.
I have decided to refuse this request for access under section 24AA(1)(a)(i) of the FOI Act on
the basis that the work involved in progressing this request would substantially and
unreasonable divert resources of the department from its other operations.
Material taken into account
7.
In making my decision, I have had regard to:
a. the terms of the request;
b. the volume of documents within the scope of the request;
c. relevant provisions of the FOI Act; and
d. the Guidelines published by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
under section 93A of the FOI Act (the Guidelines).
REASONS FOR DECISION
Section 24AA – When does a practical refusal reason exist?
8.
Section 24AA of the FOI Act outlines when a practical refusal reason exists for the purposes of
section 24. Relevantly, section 24AA(1)(a) provides that a practical refusal reason exists if:
(a) the work involved in processing the request:
i.
in the case of an agency—would substantially and unreasonably divert the
resources of the agency from its other operations
9.
Section 24(1) of the FOI Act provides that:
If an agency or Minister is satisfied, when dealing with a request for a document, that a
practical refusal reason exists in relation to the request (see section 24AA), the agency or
Minister:
(a) must undertake a request consultation process (see section 24AB); and
3
(b) if, after the request consultation process, the agency or Minister is satisfied that
the practical refusal reason still exists—the agency or Minister may refuse to give
access to the document in accordance with the request.
10.
In considering whether a practical refusal reason exists I had regard to the matters set out in
section 24AA(2), namely the resources required to perform the following activities:
a. identifying, locating or collating documents within the filing system of the agency or
minister;
b. examining the documents;
c. deciding whether to grant, refuse or defer access;
d. consulting with other parties;
e. redacting exempt material from the documents; and
f. notifying a final decision to the applicant.
11.
Searches undertaken by relevant personnel within the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) have
identified in excess of 1264 documents within scope, consisting of approximately 2328 pages
that would be required to be individually reviewed and considered prior to making a decision.
Using a conservative estimate of 3 minutes to examine each page for decision making, 2 minutes
to apply redactions per page, and a total 1 hour each to consult three third parties, it would take
one full time staff member approximately 202 hours to undertake the decision making process
and step of your request.
12.
In
VMQD and
Commissioner of Taxation (Freedom of information) [2018] AATA 4619 (17
December 2018) at paragraph 101, the Senior Tribunal Member Puplick stated that “what
constitutes valid practical refusal grounds is thus agency specific and resource dependent.
Nevertheless, for any agency, a burden in excess of 200 hours would almost certainly make the
threshold of a rational and objective test”. I have not included in this estimate, the time required
prepare and write the statement of reasons or schedule of documents. Therefore, I consider the
actual time required to fulfil this request to be higher than the estimate detailed in the paragraph
above.
13.
Taking all the above into consideration, I am satisfied that if this request were to be processed
in its current form, it would have a substantial and adverse effect on line areas ability to perform
its usual functions. On this basis, I refuse access under section 24AA of the FOI Act.
Digitally signed by nick.osborne
nick.osborne Date: 2025.04.16 10:55:31
+10'00'
JA (Nick) Osborne
Air Commodore
Accredited Decision Maker
Royal Australian Air Force
