Dear Australian Taxation Office,

This is request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

I request the following documents pertaining to current members of the ATO Executive over the last 5 years:

1. Any documents detailing gifted airline lounge memberships (such as the Qantas Chairmans' lounge or similar)

2. Any declarations made of any other gifts received, including the gift type, and estimate value.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Squiggle

Dear Joseph Fabbro,
Thank you email.
Please proceed to process my request under the act.
Further, I wish to add the following documents to the scope of this request :
1. All correspondence (with respect to gifted lounge membership) between the airlines and the individuals gifted Qantas Chairman's lounge access (or Virgin equivalent), including but not limited to the original invitations, acceptance, the recipient's declaration made to the ATO as required by ATO policies.
2. Any documents held by the ATO that detail an estimate on the value of such lounge memberships
3. Any documents that touch on matters relating to conflict of interest, or perceived conflicts of interests, of gifted airline lounge memberships.
4. Documents showing the Commissioner and ATO Executive members have completed the mandatory training that is required to be completed by all ATO staff.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Squiggle

Dear Joseph Fabbro,

Thank you for your email. I am happy to allow an additional 10 days to the standard processing time to cover the shut down period.

Yours sincerely,

Mr Squiggle

Dear FOI Team,

I refer to your email dated 6 January where you seek a 20 day extension as "as a result of the expansion of the scope" of my request.

I note the expansion of request was advised to you 2 days after my initial application, therefore I do not seek why a 20 day extension is needed - I am happy to allow an extra 10 days.

Kind regards

Yours sincerely,

Mr Squiggle

Dear FOI Officer,

I refer to documents released (your reference 1-1530SSEP-P2).

In that document there is a report that shows the declarations for Jacqueline Curtis (GR0001476) and Kirsten Fish (GR0001462). Under the 'more detail about the offer' section both ATOE members claim the following:

"I have no relationship with Qantas; Membership does not impact travel decisions I make (either for myself or as approver) - all decisions are made in accordance with the travel policy, including selecting the cheapest fare for flights at the time suitable to business requirements; membership is held by other substantive members of the ATO Executive"

I request the following documents under the FOI Act:

1. The declarations for other members of the ATO Executive (ie. other than Ms Curtis and Ms Fish)

2. Documents for the last 24 months that verify the claims of Ms Curtis and Ms Fish (and any other ATOE members who currently are members of the Qantas Chairman's Lounge access )that "all decisions [they have] made [are] in accordance with the travel policy, including selecting the cheapest fare for flights at the time suitable to business requirements".

To assist in the administration of this, I propose that an aggregate summary of the numbers of flights taken, and the total expenditure with each airline would suffice in the first instance. If you are not willing to compile this information, then I request that you provide each individual booking receipt so I can make the calculations myself.

In the event there is significant favouring of one airline over the other (let's assume Qantas is the winner here), I request more specific detail on the business reasons as to why Qantas was preferred over Virgin for each flight (presumably such information would have been recorded at the time in the interests of recording keeping and accountability).

Please let me know if you require any further information or if there is anything I can do to assist you with processing this request.

Sincerely

Mr. Squiggle

Dear FOI Officer

REQUEST FOR INTERNAL REVIEW

I refer to your decision letter of 24 January 2025 (Your reference 1-1530SSEP).

I request an internal review of your decision to refuse access, or grant only partial access to documents under scope of this request, for the reasons set out below.

1. The ATO Executive are senior leaders of the ATO and the APS. They set the standard of behaviour for general ATO staff. They should expect a higher degree of scrutiny than general employees.

2. In documents released (1-1530SSEP-P2) under 'Scenario: Complimentary passes" the CEI (Chief Executive Instruction) gives an example of 'Nathan', presumably a general ATO employee, who wants to attend an IT expo. The instruction states "The complimentary passes [to the expo] should be politely declined...the cost of each pass is significant, and it may be perceived as a bribe from a supplier hoping to secure ATO business. If the supplier successfully acquires an ATO contract in the future, there may also be a perceived conflict of interest".

Both ATO Executive members Jacqueline Curtis and Kirsten Fish have declared their Qantas Chairman's Lounge membership as having an "estimated value" of $100. I put to you this is well-below the commercial value of these memberships and suggest, depending on frequency of travel and utilisation of the club, the value could be $5000-$10000 per annum. I would like to see documents that demonstrate the ATO's assessment of the value [please consider this a separate request to this request for internal review, if this is your preference]. I would like to see where the $100 figure has come from. I would like to see if there is any evidence of a 'bribe' in the documents you have redacted or chosen not to release.

3. In relation to your 'management of ATO personnel' reason for exempting documents, I am not satisfied that released information would 'have a substantial and adverse effect on the ATOs management of SES employees. Advice and guidance the ATO provides its employees (including SES Services to the ATO Executive) is clearly in the public interest and open to scrutiny. The suggestion that staff would not seek advice knowing their communications may be subject to FOI requests is, frankly, fanciful.

With regard to personal privacy, it is clear information such as home addresses, phone numbers, and the like, are not the subject of this request, and so I am happy for you to exclude this information.

Finally, I refer to your statement that "any public interest there is to be served in showing the Commissioner and ATOE have received gifts, memberships or other benefits has already been achieved through the publishing of the ATO gifts register." With respect, I do not agree with statement and put to you this is not your call to make. The publishing of a gift on a register does not make it acceptable within community expectations. Nor does it mean the public have no further right to examine the relationship between a company like Qantas and the senior leaders of an agency of the Australian Public Service.

I look forward to hearing the outcome of your review.

Sincerely

Mr Squiggle