Thank you for contacting us.

This is an automatic response from the Australian Electoral Commission to confirm we have received your email.

For more information on enrolling to vote, federal elections or the AEC, visit www.aec.gov.au.

Please do not respond to this email.

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 6 December 2012 4:52 PM to the Australian
Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) in which you request under the [1]Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the ‘FOI Act’) access to the following documents:

all material touching upon the AEC's response to the revelation in 2003
that Tony Abbott had misled it in his 1998 letter in response to the AEC's
request that he disclose his donors to the AHPT

I take your reference to ‘AHPT’ to be a reference to the Australians for
Honest Politics Trust.

I note that you have requested that the charges incurred in relation to
your request be waived under section 29(5)(b) of the FOI Act on the ground
that the giving of access to the documents in question is in the general
public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public.
In support of that request you say:

In view of the public interest in a transparent democracy I request that
you provide the information requested free of charge.

I will refer your request to the appropriate delegate for consideration
and inform you of the outcome in due course.

We received your request on 6 December 2012 and the 30 day statutory
period for processing requests means that you should therefore expect a
decision from us by 7 January 2012. However, the period of 30 days may
need to be extended if we need to consult third parties, if the decision
is made impose a charge or for other reasons.

I note that your application concerns documents that:

●          may affect the business affairs of a person or an organisation;
and

●          contain personal information about a person.

As regards the business affairs of a person or an organisation, section 27
of the FOI Act provides for circumstances in which an application is
received in respect of a person’s business or professional affairs or the
business, commercial or financial affairs of an organisation.  When such
applications are received, the person or organisation concerned must be
given a reasonable opportunity to make a submission contending that the
document is exempt under section 43 of the FOI Act.

As regards personal information about a person, the consultation mechanism
under section 27A of the FOI Act applies when we believe the individual
(or their representative) may wish to contend that the requested documents
are exempt for reasons of personal privacy. We will take into account any
comments we receive from the individual but the final decision about
whether to grant you access to the documents you requested rests with the
AEC.

If a decision is taken against waiving the charges, you will be notified
of any charges in relation to your request, before we process any
requested documents or impose a final charge.

You and the relevant individual, if dissatisfied with the AEC decision,
may seek an internal review or external review by the Information
Commissioner. This will be explained in detail when a decision is
notified.

Please note that information released under the FOI Act may later be
published online on our disclosure log at
[2]http://www.aec.gov.au/footer/foi.htm, subject to certain exceptions.
(For example, personal information will not be published where this would
be unreasonable.)

We will contact you using the email address
[3][FOI #32 email] that you provided. Please
advise if you would prefer us to use an alternative means of contact. If
you have any questions, please contact me (see below for my contact
details).

Yours sincerely

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[4]cid:image004.png@01CDD6E9.BBFC4A90

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----

From: Margo Kingston
[[5]mailto:[FOI #32 email]]

Sent: Thursday, 6 December 2012 4:52 PM

To: INFO

Subject: Freedom of Information request - Australians for Honest Politics
Trust

     Dear Australian Electoral Commission,

     As a member of the citizens journalism project Australians for

     Honest Politics I request all material touching upon the AEC's

     response to the revelation in 2003 that Tony Abbott had misled it

     in his 1998 letter in response to the AEC's request that he

     disclose his donors to the AHPT.

     In view of the public interest in a transparent democracy I request

     that you provide the information requested free of charge.

     Yours faithfully,

     Margo Kingston

     [6]https://mobile.twitter.com/margokingston1

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [7][FOI #32 email]

     Is [8][AEC request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information

     requests to Australian Electoral Commission? If so, please contact

     us using this form:

     [9]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/contact

     Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be

     published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

     [10]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

     If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your

     web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2004A02...
2. http://www.aec.gov.au/footer/foi.htm
3. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
6. https://mobile.twitter.com/margokingston1
7. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
8. mailto:[AEC request email]
9. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/contact
10. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your emails of 6 December 2012 4:52 PM and 14 December 2012
5:35 PM and 5:51 PM and my email of 11 December 2012 10:47 AM about this
matter.

Your request has been referred to Paul Pirani, Chief Legal Officer, for
consideration. I have attached a scanned copy of the Chief Legal Officer’s
letter to you today.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]cid:image005.png@01CDDC5B.04C89000

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[2][mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 5:51 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

     Dear Owen Jones,

     Hi. I can't see how documents covered by my request might effect Mr

     Abbott's 'business affairs' or contain 'personal information' about

     him. My request concerns his public duties and obligations. Could

     you explain the connection you make?

     Yours sincerely,

     Margo Kingston

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[3][mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 5:35 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

     Dear Owen,

     Hi. I can't see that my request would effect the 'business affairs'

     or 'personal information' of Mr Abbott as his 1998 letter to you

     did not concern either, but related to his public duties.

     Could you explain? I'm hoping my request can be dealt with quickly

     because it is straightforward and narrow.

     Regards,

     Margo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

From: Owen Jones
Sent: Tuesday, 11 December 2012 10:47 AM
To: '[FOI #32 email]'
Cc: INFO
Subject: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 6 December 2012 4:52 PM to the Australian
Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) in which you request under the [4]Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the ‘FOI Act’) access to the following documents:

all material touching upon the AEC's response to the revelation in 2003
that Tony Abbott had misled it in his 1998 letter in response to the AEC's
request that he disclose his donors to the AHPT

I take your reference to ‘AHPT’ to be a reference to the Australians for
Honest Politics Trust.

I note that you have requested that the charges incurred in relation to
your request be waived under section 29(5)(b) of the FOI Act on the ground
that the giving of access to the documents in question is in the general
public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public.
In support of that request you say:

In view of the public interest in a transparent democracy I request that
you provide the information requested free of charge.

I will refer your request to the appropriate delegate for consideration
and inform you of the outcome in due course.

We received your request on 6 December 2012 and the 30 day statutory
period for processing requests means that you should therefore expect a
decision from us by 7 January 2012. However, the period of 30 days may
need to be extended if we need to consult third parties, if the decision
is made impose a charge or for other reasons.

I note that your application concerns documents that:

●          may affect the business affairs of a person or an organisation;
and

●          contain personal information about a person.

As regards the business affairs of a person or an organisation, section 27
of the FOI Act provides for circumstances in which an application is
received in respect of a person’s business or professional affairs or the
business, commercial or financial affairs of an organisation.  When such
applications are received, the person or organisation concerned must be
given a reasonable opportunity to make a submission contending that the
document is exempt under section 43 of the FOI Act.

As regards personal information about a person, the consultation mechanism
under section 27A of the FOI Act applies when we believe the individual
(or their representative) may wish to contend that the requested documents
are exempt for reasons of personal privacy. We will take into account any
comments we receive from the individual but the final decision about
whether to grant you access to the documents you requested rests with the
AEC.

If a decision is taken against waiving the charges, you will be notified
of any charges in relation to your request, before we process any
requested documents or impose a final charge.

You and the relevant individual, if dissatisfied with the AEC decision,
may seek an internal review or external review by the Information
Commissioner. This will be explained in detail when a decision is
notified.

Please note that information released under the FOI Act may later be
published online on our disclosure log at
[5]http://www.aec.gov.au/footer/foi.htm, subject to certain exceptions.
(For example, personal information will not be published where this would
be unreasonable.)

We will contact you using the email address
[6][FOI #32 email] that you provided. Please
advise if you would prefer us to use an alternative means of contact. If
you have any questions, please contact me (see below for my contact
details).

Yours sincerely

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[7]Description: cid:image004.png@01CDD6E9.BBFC4A90

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----

From: Margo Kingston
[[8]mailto:[FOI #32 email]]

Sent: Thursday, 6 December 2012 4:52 PM

To: INFO

Subject: Freedom of Information request - Australians for Honest Politics
Trust

     Dear Australian Electoral Commission,

     As a member of the citizens journalism project Australians for

     Honest Politics I request all material touching upon the AEC's

     response to the revelation in 2003 that Tony Abbott had misled it

     in his 1998 letter in response to the AEC's request that he

     disclose his donors to the AHPT.

     In view of the public interest in a transparent democracy I request

     that you provide the information requested free of charge.

     Yours faithfully,

     Margo Kingston

     [9]https://mobile.twitter.com/margokingston1

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [10][FOI #32 email]

     Is [11][AEC request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information

     requests to Australian Electoral Commission? If so, please contact

     us using this form:

     [12]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/contact

     Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be

     published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

     [13]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

     If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your

     web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
2. mailto:[mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
3. mailto:[mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
4. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2004A02...
5. http://www.aec.gov.au/footer/foi.htm
6. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
8. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
9. https://mobile.twitter.com/margokingston1
10. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
11. mailto:[AEC request email]
12. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/contact
13. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 21 December 2012 11:21 AM about your freedom of
information request.

Turning first to the last paragraph of your email, you say that you are
confused about whether the AEC must consult with Mr Abbott. Mr Abbott is
but one of the persons whom the AEC will be obliged to consult about your
request.

I note that the breadth of your request will require the Australian
Electoral Commission (the ‘AEC’) to consult with persons other than Mr
Abbott. You have requested:

all material touching upon the AEC's response to the revelation in 2003
that Tony Abbott had misled it in his 1998 letter in response to the AEC's
request that he disclose his donors to the AHPT

You will recall that there was public interest in the topic at the time.
The AEC received a number of freedom of information requests from
interested persons on the topic.

The Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the ‘FOI Act’) at that time did not
contain section 11C which requires the publication by the AEC of documents
released under Part III of the FOI Act (subject to certain exceptions
listed in section 11C(1) of the FOI Act). It follows that the AEC cannot
assume that persons who made an FOI request in 2003-2004 had an
expectation that the fact that they made a request would be made public.
Further, those persons contacted by the AEC in its investigation of the
matter are also entitled to be consulted before release of information
relating to them. Likewise, Mr Abbott may have views about the disclosure
of his personal information and business affairs on the AEC website.

It is a matter for you whether you wish to narrow the breadth of your
request to exclude any of these classes of persons.

Turning now to the first paragraph of your email, I note that in the
context of your assertions, Mr Abbott can only have misled the AEC about
the Australians for Honest Politics Trust (the ‘Trust’) if the activities
of the Trust were required to be reported to the AEC under the
Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the ‘CE Act’).

As you were informed by Mr Hallett, the AEC did undertake a further
investigation of the Trust’s obligation to report to the AEC in 2003 and
2004. Notices were issued to the trustees of the Trust, of which Mr Abbott
was one, under section 316 of the CE Act. Mr Abbott exercised his
statutory right under section 316(3B) of the CE Act to request the
Electoral Commission (i.e. the commissioners) to review the decision to
issue the notice to the trustees of the Trust. The Electoral Commission
obtained legal advice on the matter and concluded that the AEC did not
have reasonable grounds to issue a notice to the trustees in relation to
the Trust and as a consequence the decision to issue the notice was set
aside.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]cid:image004.png@01CDE1CB.DC242760

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston [mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Friday, 21 December 2012 11:21 AM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

     Dear Owen Jones,

     Hi. I'm not sure what to do now, as the AEC's letter seems to state

     that the AEC believes it was not misled by Mr Abbott's 1998 letter.

     but does not say how it came to form that view.

     I refer you to the extract of my book recently published online by

     New Matilda

    
([2]http://newmatilda.com/2012/12/13/did-ton...)

     and to this passage:

     'On Tuesday, 9 September 2003, I phoned Brien Hallett to inform him

     of Abbott’s admissions. He said he would "send it up the line".

     Was the AEC finally asking Abbott the questions it failed to ask

     him in 1998? "I can’t give you a running commentary on what we’re

     doing," Hallett said, because the AEC didn’t want to broadcast its

     strategy. But he gave an assurance that the AEC was no longer just

     reading media reports and was actively investigating.

     "We do take our accountability [to voters] very seriously," he

     said.

     I asked what penalties there were for misleading the AEC. He

     checked with the experts and confirmed that misleading the

     commission would come under the Uniform Criminal Code. "We don’t

     have a view on whether he has misled," Hallett said. "We don’t have

     enough evidence. If you have particular information you can put

     that before us."

     I wrote up the Abbott interview and published it on Webdiary. That

     was my evidence.'

     *

     What I am asking for is all material touching upon your response to

     my phone call with Mr Hallett, the publication of my evidence that

     Mr Abbott misled you in his 1998 letter, and the publication of my

     book which detailed that evidence. I trust this clarification will

     mean you will not start the time-clock again.

     I am also a little confused about whether you must consult with Mr

     Abbott before complying with my request, and if so why you believe

     this is required by law. Could you clarify?

     Yours sincerely,

     Margo Kingston

     -----Original Message-----

     For-Official-Use-Only

     Dear Ms Kingston

     I refer to your emails of 6 December 2012 4:52 PM and 14 December

     2012

     5:35 PM and 5:51 PM and my email of 11 December 2012 10:47 AM

     about this

     matter.

     Your request has been referred to Paul Pirani, Chief Legal

     Officer, for

     consideration. I have attached a scanned copy of the Chief Legal

     Officer.$B!G.(Bs letter to you today.

     Regards

     Owen Jones

     Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

     Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

     Australian Electoral Commission

     T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     [1][3]cid:image005.png@01CDDC5B.04C89000

     This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal

     professional

     privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that

     privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission.$B!G.(Bs Chief

     Legal

     Officer should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the

     existence or content of any advice contained in this email to a

     third

     party

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [4][FOI #32 email]

     Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be

     published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

     [5]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

     If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your

     web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
2. http://newmatilda.com/2012/12/13/did-ton...
3. file:///tmp/cid:image005.png@01CDDC5B.04C89000
4. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your emails of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM and 27 December 2012
7:41 PM (appended).

As regards the second paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012 12:40
PM, you will note from my signature block that I am a senior lawyer in the
employ of the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’).

As regards the third paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM,
the AEC does not give specific legal advice to the public. Therefore I am
unable to respond to your request. However I am referring the question of
the general application of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the ‘CE
Act’) on this topic to the appropriate AEC spokesperson for consideration.

Requests about the general operation of the CE Act may be directed to the
AEC’s media contacts notified at
[1]http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_....

As regards the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of your email of 24
December 2012 12:40 PM, in conformity with the [2]Legal Services
Directions, 2005, the AEC should not express an opinion about legislation
administered by another Commonwealth agency, in this case the
Attorney-General’s Department. You should direct your inquiry to that
Department.

Turning now to the second sentence of the fourth paragraph of your email,
my response to the second paragraph of your email applies to your
question.

As regards the fifth paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM,
I note that it is argumentative. This is a matter for the delegate to
consider when determining the question as to what access, if any, to
documents can be given in response to your request.

As regards the final paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM,
I note that you have not responded to Mr Pirani’s letter of 21 December
2012 which requested the undertaking of a request consultation process in
accordance with section 24AB of the [3]Freedom of Information Act 1982
(the ‘FOI Act’). Your email of 21 December 2012 11:21 AM indicates that
your received Mr Pirani’s letter that day, which means that the 14 day
period for the request consultation process period expires on 4 January
2012. If you do not participate in the request consultation process then
your request may be refused in accordance with section 24(1)(b) of the FOI
Act.

I do not take your email of 27 December 2012 7:41 PM as a response to Mr
Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012. The reason why I have formed this
view is that the AEC has no role in investigating offences against the
[4]Criminal Code. Where in the course of administering provisions of the
CE Act, the AEC becomes aware of a possible offence against the Criminal
Code, the AEC refers the matter to the Australian Federal Police (the
‘AFP’) for investigation and the decision whether a prosecution should be
initiated is taken by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in
light of a brief of evidence provided by the AFP. As explained in Mr
Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012, the AEC never formed a view on
whether there had been a possible offence against the Criminal Code by Mr
Tony Abbott in relation to the operation of the Australians for Honest
Politics Trust. It follows that there was no referral of the matter to the
AFP.

The AEC remains unable, without more information from you, to identify
documents that meet the specification in your request.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[5]Description: cid:image001.png@01CDE8D2.C0E08C10

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[6][mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Thursday, 27 December 2012 7:41 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

Dear Owen Jones,

Further to your latest note, as published on Webdiary and in my

book I am particularly interested in your investigations into

whether Mr Abbott breached s 137.1 of the Uniform Criminal Code. On

my reading, this would have nothing to do with whether or not he

had disclosure obligations.

[7]http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/5038/....

Rather, the elements of the offence are that a person knowingly

gave false or misleading information to a Commonwealth entity.

As you are aware, I cited this section to Mr Hallett in our 2003

phone call, and he confirmed that misleading info came under the

Uniform Criminal Code.

Yours sincerely,

Margo Kingston

For-Official-Use-Only

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[8][mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Monday, 24 December 2012 12:40 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston 2012-13 Q2
[DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

Dear Owen Jones,

In you note of December 24 you state: 'I note that in the context

of your assertions, Mr Abbott can only have misled the AEC about

the Australians for Honest Politics Trust (the ‘Trust’) if the

activities of the Trust were required to be reported to the AEC

under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the ‘CE Act’).'

So you are saying that because, as it turned out eventually, you

found that Mr Abbott did not have to disclose his donors, he had no

legal obligation to be truthful to you in his 1998 letter? Have you

taken legal advice on the correctness of this view?

I note that Section 137.1 of the Uniform Criminal Code Act (1992)

states that providing (materially) false or misleading information

or documents in "compliance or purported compliance with a law of

the Commonwealth" is a criminal offence carrying a penalty of

imprisonment for 12 months. Is it the case that the AEC does not

have the legal authority to request information so that it can

DETERMINE whether disclosure is required? If that is the case, then

it has no power at all, really.

I also not that after a review in 2003, the AEC did find that Mr

Abbott should disclose. Therefore, even on your reasoning, the

question of whether he had misled the AEC in 1998 and the

consequences of that would have been in play.

In any event, I look forward to receiving the documents as soon as

possible.

Yours sincerely,

Margo Kingston

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_...
2. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011C0...
3. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011C0...
4. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2004A04...
6. mailto:[mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
7. http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/5038/...
8. mailto:[mailto:[FOI #32 email]]

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 2 January 2013 4:34 PM addressed to the three
Commissioners of the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) and your
email to me of 3 January 2013 9:16 AM. Your emails were referred to Mr
Paul Pirani, Chief Legal Officer who is the relevant delegate for this
matter. I enclose a scanned version of Mr Pirani’s letter to you dated 3
January 2013 in reply to your emails.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]cid:image004.png@01CDE9A4.6F6DFD40

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston [mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Thursday, 3 January 2013 9:16 AM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

     Dear Owen Jones,

     In the light of your most recent note, I ask for all documents

     mentioning or referring to the allegation that Mr Abbott did not

     tell the AEC the truth about his 'legal advice' in his 1998 letter

     - from the date I brought the matter to the attention of Mr Hallett

     in 2003 to the present.

     Please advise whether this clarification comes within the scope of

     this FOI or whether I need to lodge a new request.

     Yours sincerely,

     Margo Kingston

     -----Original Message-----

     For-Official-Use-Only

     Dear Ms Kingston

     I refer to your emails of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM and 27

     December 2012

     7:41 PM (appended).

     As regards the second paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40

     PM, you will note from my signature block that I am a senior

     lawyer in the

     employ of the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’).

     As regards the third paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     the AEC does not give specific legal advice to the public.

     Therefore I am

     unable to respond to your request. However I am referring the

     question of

     the general application of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918

     (the ‘CE

     Act’) on this topic to the appropriate AEC spokesperson for

     consideration.

     Requests about the general operation of the CE Act may be directed

     to the

     AEC’s media contacts notified at

    
[1][2]http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_....

     As regards the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of your

     email of 24

     December 2012 12:40 PM, in conformity with the [2]Legal Services

     Directions, 2005, the AEC should not express an opinion about

     legislation

     administered by another Commonwealth agency, in this case the

     Attorney-General’s Department. You should direct your inquiry to

     that

     Department.

     Turning now to the second sentence of the fourth paragraph of your

     email,

     my response to the second paragraph of your email applies to your

     question.

     As regards the fifth paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     I note that it is argumentative. This is a matter for the delegate

     to

     consider when determining the question as to what access, if any,

     to

     documents can be given in response to your request.

     As regards the final paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     I note that you have not responded to Mr Pirani’s letter of 21

     December

     2012 which requested the undertaking of a request consultation

     process in

     accordance with section 24AB of the [3]Freedom of Information Act

     1982

     (the ‘FOI Act’). Your email of 21 December 2012 11:21 AM indicates

     that

     your received Mr Pirani’s letter that day, which means that the 14

     day

     period for the request consultation process period expires on 4

     January

     2012. If you do not participate in the request consultation

     process then

     your request may be refused in accordance with section 24(1)(b) of

     the FOI

     Act.

     I do not take your email of 27 December 2012 7:41 PM as a response

     to Mr

     Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012. The reason why I have formed

     this

     view is that the AEC has no role in investigating offences against

     the

     [4]Criminal Code. Where in the course of administering provisions

     of the

     CE Act, the AEC becomes aware of a possible offence against the

     Criminal

     Code, the AEC refers the matter to the Australian Federal Police

     (the

     ‘AFP’) for investigation and the decision whether a prosecution

     should be

     initiated is taken by the Commonwealth Director of Public

     Prosecutions in

     light of a brief of evidence provided by the AFP. As explained in

     Mr

     Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012, the AEC never formed a view

     on

     whether there had been a possible offence against the Criminal

     Code by Mr

     Tony Abbott in relation to the operation of the Australians for

     Honest

     Politics Trust. It follows that there was no referral of the

     matter to the

     AFP.

     The AEC remains unable, without more information from you, to

     identify

     documents that meet the specification in your request.

     Regards

     Owen Jones

     Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

     Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

     Australian Electoral Commission

     T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     [5]Description: [3]cid:image001.png@01CDE8D2.C0E08C10

     This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal

     professional

     privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that

     privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal

     Officer

     should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the

     existence or

     content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [4][FOI #32 email]

     Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be

     published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

     [5]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

     If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your

     web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
2. http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_...
3. file:///tmp/cid:image001.png@01CDE8D2.C0E08C10
4. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 3 January 2013 5:54 PM about your FOI request.

I note from the thread appended to your email that you are addressing my
email to you of 2 January 2013 11:26 AM and not my email of 3 January 2013
11:21 AM.

My email of 3 January 2013 11:21 AM forwarded Mr Pirani’s letter to you of
3 January 2012 which indicated what was required to make the consultation
process successful in identifying the documents required. Please address
Mr Pirani’s letter in completing the consultation.

You will recall that Mr Pirani in his letter to you of 17 December 2012
sought your views whether you wished to extend the consultation period to
11 January 2013. You have never expressed you views on an extension. Do
you wish to take advantage of the extension?

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]cid:image003.png@01CDEA5C.4EA35430

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston [mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Thursday, 3 January 2013 5:54 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]

     Dear Owen Jones,

     In reply to your email today. I advise that I did not email the

     Commissioners about my FOI request. I used information obtained

     during correspondence about my FOI to seek their advice on whether

     the Commission had ‘never formed a view on whether there had been a

     possible offence against the Criminal Code by Mr Tony Abbott in

     relation to the operation of the Australians for Honest Politics

     Trust’. If it had not, I also asked whether the Commission was

     prepared to form a view on the matter. I look forward to their

     response.

     In relation to the status of my current request, does the

     clarification I made in my January 3 email satisfy your

     requirement? ‘I ask for all documents mentioning or referring to

     the allegation that Mr Abbott did not tell the AEC the truth about

     his 'legal advice' in his 1998 letter - from the date I brought the

     matter to the attention of Mr Hallett in 2003 to the present’.

     Yours sincerely,

     Margo Kingston

     -----Original Message-----

     For-Official-Use-Only

     Dear Ms Kingston

     I refer to your emails of 24 December 2012 12:40 PM and 27

     December 2012

     7:41 PM (appended).

     As regards the second paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40

     PM, you will note from my signature block that I am a senior

     lawyer in the

     employ of the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’).

     As regards the third paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     the AEC does not give specific legal advice to the public.

     Therefore I am

     unable to respond to your request. However I am referring the

     question of

     the general application of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918

     (the ‘CE

     Act’) on this topic to the appropriate AEC spokesperson for

     consideration.

     Requests about the general operation of the CE Act may be directed

     to the

     AEC’s media contacts notified at

    
[1][2]http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_....

     As regards the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of your

     email of 24

     December 2012 12:40 PM, in conformity with the [2]Legal Services

     Directions, 2005, the AEC should not express an opinion about

     legislation

     administered by another Commonwealth agency, in this case the

     Attorney-General’s Department. You should direct your inquiry to

     that

     Department.

     Turning now to the second sentence of the fourth paragraph of your

     email,

     my response to the second paragraph of your email applies to your

     question.

     As regards the fifth paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     I note that it is argumentative. This is a matter for the delegate

     to

    consider when determining the question as to what access, if any,

     to

     documents can be given in response to your request.

     As regards the final paragraph of your email of 24 December 2012

     12:40 PM,

     I note that you have not responded to Mr Pirani’s letter of 21

     December

     2012 which requested the undertaking of a request consultation

     process in

     accordance with section 24AB of the [3]Freedom of Information Act

     1982

     (the ‘FOI Act’). Your email of 21 December 2012 11:21 AM indicates

     that

     your received Mr Pirani’s letter that day, which means that the 14

     day

     period for the request consultation process period expires on 4

     January

     2012. If you do not participate in the request consultation

     process then

     your request may be refused in accordance with section 24(1)(b) of

     the FOI

     Act.

     I do not take your email of 27 December 2012 7:41 PM as a response

     to Mr

     Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012. The reason why I have formed

     this

     view is that the AEC has no role in investigating offences against

     the

     [4]Criminal Code. Where in the course of administering provisions

     of the

     CE Act, the AEC becomes aware of a possible offence against the

     Criminal

     Code, the AEC refers the matter to the Australian Federal Police

     (the

     ‘AFP’) for investigation and the decision whether a prosecution

     should be

     initiated is taken by the Commonwealth Director of Public

     Prosecutions in

     light of a brief of evidence provided by the AFP. As explained in

     Mr

     Pirani’s letter of 21 December 2012, the AEC never formed a view

     on

     whether there had been a possible offence against the Criminal

     Code by Mr

     Tony Abbott in relation to the operation of the Australians for

     Honest

     Politics Trust. It follows that there was no referral of the

     matter to the

     AFP.

     The AEC remains unable, without more information from you, to

     identify

     documents that meet the specification in your request.

     Regards

     Owen Jones

     Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

     Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

     Australian Electoral Commission

     T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     [5]Description: [3]cid:image001.png@01CDE8D2.C0E08C10

     This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal

     professional

     privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that

     privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal

     Officer

     should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the

     existence or

     content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [4][FOI #32 email]

     Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be

     published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

     [5]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

     If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your

     web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
2. http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Contact_...
3. file:///tmp/cid:image001.png@01CDE8D2.C0E08C10
4. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I enclose a scanned version of the letter to you from the Chief Legal
Officer, Mr Paul Pirani dated 29 January 2013.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services | Legal and Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: 02 6271 4528 | M: [not used]| F: 02 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

hide quoted sections

For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Ms Kingston

I enclose a scanned copy of the letter from Mr Paul Pirani, Chief Legal
Officer, dated 12 March 2012 notifying you of the decision that he made
about your freedom of information request.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral
Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

For-Official-Use-Only

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email/
2. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email-promo/

hide quoted sections

Sensitive:Legal

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to our telephone conversation yesterday when you inquired whether
the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) would agree to receive a
submission from you in relation to the imposition of a charge for access
in accordance with your freedom of information request in relation to the
Hon Tony Abbott MP and the Australians for Honest Politics Trust. Your
submission is out of time since the time for making it passed on 8 April
2013 and the application was taken as withdrawn.

I have discussed your request with the delegate who has indicated that he
cannot on the basis of you telephone call make a decision to extend time
for making your submission. He asks that you write setting out your
reasons for making the submission out of time and at the same time set out
the submission about the charges that you wish to make.

As regards you submission for an extension of time you should provide an
acceptable explanation of the delay that shows that it is fair and
equitable in the circumstances to extend time. This should address the
fairness in reopening your request in circumstances where the AEC
undertook a request consultation with a person whose interests were
affected by your request. The submission should be provided to the AEC by
19 April 2013.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral
Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sensitive:Legal

Sensitive:Legal

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email/
2. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email-promo/

hide quoted sections

Sensitive:Personal

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to you email of 12 April 2013 11:47 AM seeking an extension of
time in which to make a submission that the charges notified to you should
be changed.

I note in your email you stated the reason for your delay in making the
submission in the following terms:

I misread your decision letter, mistakenly believing that I had until
April 12 to seek a remission or waiver of fees, when the time to lodge an
internal review expired. I discovered my mistake when preparing my request
on April 11.

I note that you did not respond to my suggestion in my email to you of
12/04/13 10:25 AM that your reasons should provide:

an acceptable explanation of the delay that shows that it is fair and
equitable in the circumstances to extend time. This should address the
fairness in reopening your request in circumstances where the AEC
undertook a request consultation with a person whose interests were
affected by your request.

As a consequence the delegate had no basis on which to find that you had
offered an acceptable explanation of the delay. Further, when taking into
account the lack of fairness in re-opening your request as regards the
interests of the person consulted by the Australian Electoral Commission
in relation to your request, it seems unreasonable to accede to your
request to extend time for making a submission about the charges.
Accordingly your request for an extension was refused by the delegate.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral
Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[[3]mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Friday, 12 April 2013 11:47 AM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]

Dear Owen Jones,

Hi. My reason for not replying to you earlier was that I misread your
decision letter, mistakenly believing that I had until April 12 to seek a
remission or waiver of fees, when the time to lodge an internal review
expired. I discovered my mistake when preparing my request on April 11.

I apologise for this error and advise that should my request for an
extension of time not be granted I will lodge a fresh FOI in the terms
upon which we agreed in this one, so your consultation with a third party
would not be in vain. I also advise that should you reject my arguments
for remission or waiver of fees I will raise the funds to pay you,
assisted by a Twitter appeal.

My reasons for seeking a remission of fees are:

*           You have charged the same amount as for my 2004 request, which
you have decided was substantially the same. However the charging regime
has changed since 2004, and I question whether you have taken the changes
into account.

*           It is unreasonable that you prepared a schedule of documents
when you estimated that only 5 percent of the documents on file were
relevant. I therefore request that your charge of $530 be remitted. A
glance at most files would have shown they were not relevant, and the Act
requires that the decision maker act in the most efficient and practical
way possible. Since you have prepared a schedule I ask that it be released
to me.

*           You have charged $60 for three hours of decision making. My
understanding is that under the Act the first 5 hours of decision making
are free.

My reasons for disagreeing with your decision not to waive fees are:

*           The reason that I did not pursue my 2004 request was that the
AEC communicated its decision after the deadline for my book had passed. I
noted in my book that the AEC had failed to meet its legal deadlines for
processing several FOI requests, without explanation. You are therefore
incorrect to state that that I had circumvented the Act’s requirements by
renewing my application after it had lapsed ‘to avoid paying charges
imposed on the giving of access’. In fact, I made my current request in
response to Mr Abbott’s allegations that the Prime Minister had showed bad
character in her dealings with the AWU slush fund.

*           The public interest in this matter is not about whether the
AEC should have taken action about Mr Abbott’s statements in his 1998
letter as you suggest. It is about the honesty and credibility of Mr
Abbott, which is a key issue in the forthcoming federal election.

*           The issue of financial gain does not arise in this request
because I have not made it for a book or other commercial purpose.

*           I will suffer financial hardship if I have to pay, as I have
minimal income and am living off my savings.

In relation to the documents you found which meet the terms of my request,
I note that there are no documents which indicate that the AEC has any
record of my 2004 allegations that Mr Abbott did not tell the truth in
relation to the timing of his legal advice on the AFHP trust. May I take
it from this that the AEC officer I spoke to made no note or other record
of our telephone conversation, and that the AEC has no note of the
contemporaneous story published in the Sydney Morning Herald’s Webdiary on
the matter or Mr Abbott's published reply or the detailed account in the
relevant chapter in my 2004 book Not Happy, John?

As you know, your Mr Hallett told me in the 2004 conversation that he
would ‘send it up the line’. Am I right in assuming that, in the absence
of any documentation, this did not occur?

Yours sincerely,

Margo Kingston

-----Original Message-----

Sensitive:Legal

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to our telephone conversation yesterday when you inquired whether
the Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) would agree to receive a
submission from you in relation to the imposition of a charge for access
in accordance with your freedom of information request in relation to the
Hon Tony Abbott MP and the Australians for Honest Politics Trust.

Your submission is out of time since the time for making it passed on 8
April 2013 and the application was taken as withdrawn.

I have discussed your request with the delegate who has indicated that he
cannot on the basis of you telephone call make a decision to extend time
for making your submission. He asks that you write setting out your
reasons for making the submission out of time and at the same time set out
the submission about the charges that you wish to make.

As regards you submission for an extension of time you should provide an
acceptable explanation of the delay that shows that it is fair and
equitable in the circumstances to extend time. This should address the
fairness in reopening your request in circumstances where the AEC
undertook a request consultation with a person whose interests were
affected by your request. The submission should be provided to the AEC by
19 April 2013.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[4][FOI #32 email]

Write your response as plain text. Only send PDF documents as a last
resort. Government guidelines make it clear that PDF is not an acceptable
format for you to use in the delivery of government information.

[5]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[6]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Sensitive:Personal

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email/
2. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email-promo/
3. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
4. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...
6. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections

Sensitive:Legal

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to your email of 15 April 2013 4:40 PM about this matter.

As mentioned in my email of 12 April 2013 10:25 AM your submission is out
of time since the time for making it passed on 8 April 2013 and the
application was taken as withdrawn. As your application for an extension
of time to make a submission was refused as explained in my email of 15
April 2013 4:40 PM (appended), it follows that you need to either seek an
Information Commissioner review (as mentioned in Mr Pirani’s letter to you
of 12 March 2013) or make a fresh application.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral
Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

----Original Message-----
From: Margo Kingston
[[3]mailto:[FOI #32 email]]
Sent: Monday, 15 April 2013 4:40 PM
To: Owen Jones
Subject: Re: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
[DLM=Sensitive:Personal]

Dear Owen Jones,

HI. Am I able to get the documents if I pay the charge or do I have to
make a new request?

Yours sincerely,

Margo Kingston

-----Original Message-----

From: Owen Jones
Sent: Monday, 15 April 2013 4:04 PM
To: [FOI #32 email]
Cc: Paul Pirani
Subject: LS4451 FOI request by M Kingston [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]
[DLM=Sensitive:Personal]

Sensitive:Personal

Dear Ms Kingston

I refer to you email of 12 April 2013 11:47 AM seeking an extension of
time in which to make a submission that the charges notified to you should
be changed.

I note in your email you stated the reason for your delay in making the
submission in the following terms:

I misread your decision letter, mistakenly believing that I had until
April 12 to seek a remission or waiver of fees, when the time to lodge an
internal review expired. I discovered my mistake when preparing my request
on April 11.

I note that you did not respond to my suggestion in my email to you of
12/04/13 10:25 AM that your reasons should provide an acceptable
explanation of the delay that shows that it is fair and equitable in the
circumstances to extend time. This should address the fairness in
reopening your request in circumstances where the AEC undertook a request
consultation with a person whose interests were affected by your request.

As a consequence the delegate had no basis on which to find that you had
offered an acceptable explanation of the delay. Further, when taking into
account the lack of fairness in re-opening your request as regards the
interests of the person consulted by the Australian Electoral Commission
in relation to your request, it seems unreasonable to accede to your
request to extend time for making a submission about the charges.

Accordingly your request for an extension was refused by the delegate.

Regards

Owen Jones

Owen Jones | Senior Lawyer

Legal Services Section | Legal & Compliance Branch

Australian Electoral Commission

T: (02) 6271 4528 | F: (02) 6271 4457

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Australian Electoral Commission logo [2]Australian Electoral Commission

This email may contain legal advice that is subject to legal professional
privilege. Care should be taken to avoid unintended waiver of that
privilege. The Australian Electoral Commission’s Chief Legal Officer
should be consulted prior to any decision to disclose the existence or
content of any advice contained in this email to a third party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[4][FOI #32 email]

Write your response as plain text. Only send PDF documents as a last
resort. Government guidelines make it clear that PDF is not an acceptable
format for you to use in the delivery of government information.

[5]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[6]http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Sensitive:Legal

Sensitive:Legal

DISCLAIMER:

If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
immediately by return email and delete all copies. If this email or any
attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
information in the email or attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email/
2. http://emailfooter.aec.gov.au/email-promo/
3. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
4. mailto:[FOI #32 email]
5. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...
6. http://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offic...

hide quoted sections