Comcare PIN as reported by the Saturday paper
Dear FOI OFFICER,
I am writing this message in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) to formally request access to documents related to the Provisional Improvement Notice reportedly issued to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission by Comcare on April 22, 2023. A June 3, 2023, article by The Saturday Paper brought this issue to light, suggesting the notice was a response to severe staffing shortages and the organisation's consistent failure or reluctance to address escalating workloads, leading to psychological distress within the Commission.
The report highlighted attempts by the Commission to either deny or obscure the existence of this notice from its staff, thus raising significant questions about the Commission's transparency and integrity.
In light of the substantial public interest in the governance and operational conduct of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, I am seeking access to the following documents:
1. A complete, unredacted copy of the Provisional Improvement Notice issued by Comcare on April 22, 2023.
2. All correspondence, including letters, emails, and other forms of communication, between the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and Comcare about the issuance, challenge, and subsequent handling of the Provisional Improvement Notice.
3. All internal communications, including emails, meeting notes, or minutes, discussing the Provisional Improvement Notice and its communication to Commission employees.
4. Any subsequent reports, analyses, or internal reviews performed by the Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice.
Please note that I am fully aware of the need to protect the personal information of individuals. As such, I consent to all names of APS and EL staff being redacted in the documents in response to this request.
Given the substantial public interest in ensuring transparency and accountability of the Commission's operations, I do not intend to bear any costs associated with this Freedom of Information request. I trust that you recognise the significance of this matter and will not impose any charges for processing this request.
Should my request be denied in part or its entirety, I request that you provide a detailed explanation, referencing the specific exemptions of the Act that justify such denial.
I eagerly await your prompt attention to this matter and anticipate receiving a response within 30 days, as stipulated by the Act.
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Yours sincerely
Ace Chapman
Thank you for emailing the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
This inbox is monitored between 9 am and 5 pm (AEST), Monday to Friday and
we will respond to your enquiry within 5 business days.
Alternatively you can contact us on 1800 035 544, or visit the website at
[1]www.ndiscommission.gov.au for information and resources.
This is an automated email. Please do not respond.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Dear Ace Chapman
Thank you for your email received by the NDIS Quality and Safeguards
Commission (the Commission) on Saturday, 3 June 2023, in which you
requested access to documents under the Commonwealth Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
I understand your request to be as follows:
“1. A complete, unredacted copy of the Provisional Improvement Notice
issued by Comcare on April 22, 2023.
2. All correspondence, including letters, emails, and other forms of
communication, between the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and
Comcare about the issuance, challenge, and subsequent handling of the
Provisional Improvement Notice.
3. All internal communications, including emails, meeting notes, or
minutes, discussing the Provisional Improvement Notice and its
communication to Commission employees.
4. Any subsequent reports, analyses, or internal reviews performed by the
Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice.”
I note your consent to APS and EL staff names being redacted in the
documents in response to the request. I also note your comments in respect
of processing charges.
Request to revise scope
Under section 15(2)(b) of the FOI Act, a request must provide enough
information to enable a processing officer to identify the particular
documents requested.
In its current form, the parameters of the request at points 2-4 are
sufficiently broad to potentially mean a practical refusal reason may
exist under ss 24AA(a)(i) and 24(b).
We invite you to refine the scope of the request. You may wish to refine
the scope of your request by:
· Nominating the relevant date range of the documents you seek
· Nominating whose correspondence you are seeking, i.e. which
officers, or class of officers?
· Excluding any draft documents
· Excluding any duplicates
· Removing manuals or policy documents from the scope of the request
· Excluding any documents obtained in confidence, and
· Excluding documents the subject of legal professional privilege
Alternately, you may wish to revise your request to be for a few specific
documents or types of documents you believe are held by the Commission,
such as emails between [officer] and [officer], or reports
relating to Provisional Improvement Notice for a requested period.
Please note that even if you do modify your request, it is possible that a
practical refusal reason under subsection 24AA(1)(a)(i) may still exist.
As far as is reasonably practicable, we are happy to provide you with
further information to assist you in making your request in such a form
that
removes the practical refusal ground.
Timeline
The statutory period for processing your request is 30 days commencing
from the day after your request was received.
The 30-day period may be extended under certain conditions, including if
third parties are required to be consulted, or where a request
consultation process is required. We will advise you if this happens.
Next steps
Please send clarification of the scope of your to
[1][NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email] by COB 8 June 2023.
Your prompt assistance in request of the queries above would be greatly
appreciated. Please note, if your request is not able to be sufficiently
refined, I may need to proceed to issue a 24AB consultation notice
(intention to refuse).
Kind regards
FOI officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Chapman <[FOI #10361 email]>
Sent: Saturday, 3 June 2023 8:11 AM
To: FOI (NDIS Commission) <[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Comcare PIN as reported by the
Saturday paper
Dear FOI OFFICER,
I am writing this message in accordance with the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 (Cth) to formally request access to documents related to the
Provisional Improvement Notice reportedly issued to the NDIS Quality and
Safeguards Commission by Comcare on April 22, 2023. A June 3, 2023,
article by The Saturday Paper brought this issue to light, suggesting the
notice was a response to severe staffing shortages and the organisation's
consistent failure or reluctance to address escalating workloads, leading
to psychological distress within the Commission.
The report highlighted attempts by the Commission to either deny or
obscure the existence of this notice from its staff, thus raising
significant questions about the Commission's transparency and integrity.
In light of the substantial public interest in the governance and
operational conduct of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, I am
seeking access to the following documents:
1. A complete, unredacted copy of the Provisional Improvement Notice
issued by Comcare on April 22, 2023.
2. All correspondence, including letters, emails, and other forms of
communication, between the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and
Comcare about the issuance, challenge, and subsequent handling of the
Provisional Improvement Notice.
3. All internal communications, including emails, meeting notes, or
minutes, discussing the Provisional Improvement Notice and its
communication to Commission employees.
4. Any subsequent reports, analyses, or internal reviews performed by the
Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice.
Please note that I am fully aware of the need to protect the personal
information of individuals. As such, I consent to all names of APS and EL
staff being redacted in the documents in response to this request.
Given the substantial public interest in ensuring transparency and
accountability of the Commission's operations, I do not intend to bear any
costs associated with this Freedom of Information request. I trust that
you recognise the significance of this matter and will not impose any
charges for processing this request.
Should my request be denied in part or its entirety, I request that you
provide a detailed explanation, referencing the specific exemptions of the
Act that justify such denial.
I eagerly await your prompt attention to this matter and anticipate
receiving a response within 30 days, as stipulated by the Act.
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Yours sincerely
Ace Chapman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[2][FOI #10361 email]
Is [3][NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email] the wrong address for Freedom of
Information requests to NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission? If so,
please contact us using this form:
[4]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This
message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet.
More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
[5]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]
2. mailto:[FOI #10361 email]
3. mailto:[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]
4. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...
5. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Dear FOI Officer,
I appreciate your advice on my original request made under the Commonwealth Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act). It's vital that we adhere to the principles of transparency and accountability, especially in light of the substantial public interest in the Provisional Improvement Notice issued to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
Considering your recommendations and the availability of certain documents on the 'Right to Know' website, I agree that refining the scope of my request is warranted.
Therefore, I revise my request as follows:
1. Official correspondence, including but not limited to emails and letters, between the Senior Executive Service (SES) Officers: Tracey Mackey, Sian Leatham, Catherine Meyer, Lisa Pulko, and Comcare, in relation to the aftermath of the issuance of the Provisional Improvement Notice from April 23, 2023, to present. This excludes the PIN itself and the appeal document sent to Comcare, which is publicly accessible.
2. Internal communications among the aforementioned SES Officers about the Provisional Improvement Notice, its implications, and its communication within the Commission within the same date range.
3. Reports or assessments conducted by the Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice within the specified date range, with direct involvement or oversight from the listed SES Officers. The appeal document sent to Comcare is not included in this request.
4. Clarification on the exact date the Commission received the original Provisional Improvement Notice sent c/o the Department of Social Services (DSS).
In my revised request, I exclude draft documents, duplicates, manuals or policy documents, documents obtained in confidence, and documents protected under legal professional privilege. However, I must underscore that discussions and emails between the SES Officers about this issue do not qualify as legal professional privilege, as defined in Sections 42(1) and 42(2) of the FOI Act.
Should any part of my request be denied, I request a thorough explanation with specific references to the appropriate exemptions under the Act.
If further amendments to my request are required to remove potential practical refusal reasons as per Section 24AA of the FOI Act, I request your prompt advice.
I trust this refined request aligns with your suggestions and ensures a more streamlined process. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to receiving a response within the statutory timeframe.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
Thank you for emailing the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
This inbox is monitored between 9 am and 5 pm (AEST), Monday to Friday and
we will respond to your enquiry within 5 business days.
Alternatively you can contact us on 1800 035 544, or visit the website at
[1]www.ndiscommission.gov.au for information and resources.
This is an automated email. Please do not respond.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Good morning Ace Chapman,
Thank you for your prompt response, and for refining your search. We acknowledge your request as valid for the purposes of the FOI Act.
At present, your decision is due on 3 July 2023. As noted in our previous email, there may be circumstances where this timeline may be extended. This includes where third parties are required to be consulted under the FOI Act. If this turns out to be the case, we will be in contact with you as soon as possible.
If you have any questions in the meantime, please feel free to contact the Commission at [NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email].
Kind regards,
FOI Officer
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [email address]
www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders both past and present.
Note: This email and any attachments may contain confidential or legally privileged information (and neither are waived or lost if this email has been sent to you by mistake). If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy or retain it. If you have received it in error, please let me know by reply email and then delete this email from your system and do not retain any copy. Recipients within the NDIS Commission should seek assistance from General Counsel before disseminating this email to third parties or using this advice for a different matter.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Chapman <[FOI #10361 email]>
Sent: Monday, 5 June 2023 9:02 PM
To: FOI (NDIS Commission) <[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]>
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request - Comcare PIN as reported by the Saturday paper [LEX 2012] [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Dear FOI Officer,
I appreciate your advice on my original request made under the Commonwealth Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act). It's vital that we adhere to the principles of transparency and accountability, especially in light of the substantial public interest in the Provisional Improvement Notice issued to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
Considering your recommendations and the availability of certain documents on the 'Right to Know' website, I agree that refining the scope of my request is warranted.
Therefore, I revise my request as follows:
1. Official correspondence, including but not limited to emails and letters, between the Senior Executive Service (SES) Officers: Tracey Mackey, Sian Leatham, Catherine Meyer, Lisa Pulko, and Comcare, in relation to the aftermath of the issuance of the Provisional Improvement Notice from April 23, 2023, to present. This excludes the PIN itself and the appeal document sent to Comcare, which is publicly accessible.
2. Internal communications among the aforementioned SES Officers about the Provisional Improvement Notice, its implications, and its communication within the Commission within the same date range.
3. Reports or assessments conducted by the Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice within the specified date range, with direct involvement or oversight from the listed SES Officers. The appeal document sent to Comcare is not included in this request.
4. Clarification on the exact date the Commission received the original Provisional Improvement Notice sent c/o the Department of Social Services (DSS).
In my revised request, I exclude draft documents, duplicates, manuals or policy documents, documents obtained in confidence, and documents protected under legal professional privilege. However, I must underscore that discussions and emails between the SES Officers about this issue do not qualify as legal professional privilege, as defined in Sections 42(1) and 42(2) of the FOI Act.
Should any part of my request be denied, I request a thorough explanation with specific references to the appropriate exemptions under the Act.
If further amendments to my request are required to remove potential practical refusal reasons as per Section 24AA of the FOI Act, I request your prompt advice.
I trust this refined request aligns with your suggestions and ensures a more streamlined process. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to receiving a response within the statutory timeframe.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
-----Original Message-----
Dear Ace Chapman
Thank you for your email received by the NDIS Quality and Safeguards
Commission (the Commission) on Saturday, 3 June 2023, in which you
requested access to documents under the Commonwealth Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
I understand your request to be as follows:
“1. A complete, unredacted copy of the Provisional Improvement Notice
issued by Comcare on April 22, 2023.
2. All correspondence, including letters, emails, and other forms of
communication, between the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and
Comcare about the issuance, challenge, and subsequent handling of the
Provisional Improvement Notice.
3. All internal communications, including emails, meeting notes, or
minutes, discussing the Provisional Improvement Notice and its
communication to Commission employees.
4. Any subsequent reports, analyses, or internal reviews performed by the
Commission in response to the Provisional Improvement Notice.”
I note your consent to APS and EL staff names being redacted in the
documents in response to the request. I also note your comments in respect
of processing charges.
Request to revise scope
Under section 15(2)(b) of the FOI Act, a request must provide enough
information to enable a processing officer to identify the particular
documents requested.
In its current form, the parameters of the request at points 2-4 are
sufficiently broad to potentially mean a practical refusal reason may
exist under ss 24AA(a)(i) and 24(b).
We invite you to refine the scope of the request. You may wish to refine
the scope of your request by:
· Nominating the relevant date range of the documents you seek
· Nominating whose correspondence you are seeking, i.e. which
officers, or class of officers?
· Excluding any draft documents
· Excluding any duplicates
· Removing manuals or policy documents from the scope of the request
· Excluding any documents obtained in confidence, and
· Excluding documents the subject of legal professional privilege
Alternately, you may wish to revise your request to be for a few specific
documents or types of documents you believe are held by the Commission,
such as emails between [officer] and [officer], or reports
relating to Provisional Improvement Notice for a requested period.
Please note that even if you do modify your request, it is possible that a
practical refusal reason under subsection 24AA(1)(a)(i) may still exist.
As far as is reasonably practicable, we are happy to provide you with
further information to assist you in making your request in such a form
that
removes the practical refusal ground.
Timeline
The statutory period for processing your request is 30 days commencing
from the day after your request was received.
The 30-day period may be extended under certain conditions, including if
third parties are required to be consulted, or where a request
consultation process is required. We will advise you if this happens.
Next steps
Please send clarification of the scope of your to
[1][NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email] by COB 8 June 2023.
Your prompt assistance in request of the queries above would be greatly
appreciated. Please note, if your request is not able to be sufficiently
refined, I may need to proceed to issue a 24AB consultation notice
(intention to refuse).
Kind regards
FOI officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #10361 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Good afternoon Mr Chapman,
This email is in relation to your current FOI request with the NDIS
Commission (FOI ref: FOI Request No 48).
Third Party Consultation Required
The purpose of this email is to inform you that the NDIS Commission has
conducted a search for documents that fall within the scope of your FOI
request and that search has located documents that contain information of
a business and/or personal nature of a third party. A third party is a
person or business that is not yourself as the applicant of the FOI
request to the NDIS Commission, or the Commission itself.
Sections 27 (business documents) and 27A (documents affecting personal
privacy) of the FOI Act require that I consider whether third parties
identified in documents might reasonably wish to make an exemption
contention because of business information in a document.
I have reviewed the documents that fall within the scope of your FOI
request and I have formed the view that certain third parties identified
in the documents might reasonably wish to make a submission on the release
of their business and/or personal information.
As such, the Commission must consult the third parties before an access
decision is made. Under section 15(6)(a), the Commission is granted an
additional 30 days to process the request. Your decision, as a result, is
now due on 2 August 2023.
Confidentiality
The NDIS Commission cannot disclose your identity to third parties
identified for consultation without your consent. Could you please advise
if you consent to the NDIS Commission providing your identity as the FOI
Applicant to third parties being consulted on your FOI request?
Next steps
Please provide your response to the above question regarding your identity
by COB Friday 23 June 2023.
If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to get in contact
with the FOI team at [1][NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email].
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
[2]cid:image001.jpg@01D41218.BD3EEDC0
E: [3][email address]
[4]www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures,
and to elders both past and present.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Dear FOI Officer,
Thank you for your recent communication regarding the need for third-party consultation concerning my Freedom of Information request. I appreciate your diligence in ensuring that the rights and privacy of all parties involved are respected.
However, before I can provide my consent for the disclosure of my identity to the third parties involved, I would like to request some additional information better to understand the context and implications of this consultation.
1. Identification of Third Parties: While I understand that you may be unable to provide specific names due to privacy and confidentiality concerns, a general description or categorisation of these third parties would be beneficial. For instance, are these third parties external consultants, other government agencies, private entities, or individuals outside the SES Officers mentioned in my request?
2. Role and Involvement of Third Parties: Could you please elaborate on how these third parties fit into the scope of my request? My request primarily concerns communications between specific Senior Executive Service (SES) Officers and the Provisional Improvement Notice's broader context. Therefore, understanding these third parties' roles and involvement in these communications or the Provisional Improvement Notice's issuance and handling would be extremely helpful.
3. Impact on the Information Requested: Lastly, I would like to understand how the involvement of these third parties might affect the information I have requested. Will their involvement potentially lead to redactions or exclusions in the documents provided? If so, please explain the rationale behind these redactions or exclusions.
Your clarification on these points will help me make an informed decision about providing consent for disclosing my identity. Understanding these aspects is crucial for maintaining transparency and trust in this process.
I appreciate your assistance and look forward to your prompt response.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
Thank you for emailing the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
This inbox is monitored between 9 am and 5 pm (AEST), Monday to Friday and
we will respond to your enquiry within 5 business days.
Alternatively you can contact us on 1800 035 544, or visit the website at
[1]www.ndiscommission.gov.au for information and resources.
This is an automated email. Please do not respond.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Good morning Mr Chapman,
Thank you for your response.
Just to clarify, we are requesting your consent for the Commission to identify you as the applicant to the third-party in consultations regarding third-party documents. For the avoidance of doubt, (with your consent) we propose disclosing to the third-party during consultation a statement to the effect ‘that Ace Chapman is the FOI applicant of this request’. Notwithstanding your request and correspondence is automatically published on the Right to Know website, we are still required to seek your consent before disclosing applicant’s identity to a third-party.
If you do not wish for us to disclose ‘Ace Chapman’ as the applicant during consultations, we would refrain from doing so and would continue to consult the third party in respect of relevant documents without identifying you, Ace Chapman, as the applicant.
The FOI Guidelines at [3.40] provide:
"An applicant’s identity should not be provided to any third party without prior consultation and agreement by the applicant. This also applies if there is a request consultation process under ss 26A, 27 or 27A or if another agency is consulted. Nevertheless, knowing an applicant’s identity may help a third party decide more easily whether to object to disclosure and to frame any specific objections, and this issue can be raised with an applicant in consultation."
I trust this assists and please don’t hesitate if you have any questions. We would be grateful for a response by COB 26 June 2023.
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [email address]
www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders both past and present.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Chapman <[FOI #10361 email]>
Sent: Wednesday, 21 June 2023 1:09 PM
To: FOI (NDIS Commission) <[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]>
Subject: Re: Your FOI request - Notice of Extension of Time due to Consultation [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Dear FOI Officer,
Thank you for your recent communication regarding the need for third-party consultation concerning my Freedom of Information request. I appreciate your diligence in ensuring that the rights and privacy of all parties involved are respected.
However, before I can provide my consent for the disclosure of my identity to the third parties involved, I would like to request some additional information better to understand the context and implications of this consultation.
1. Identification of Third Parties: While I understand that you may be unable to provide specific names due to privacy and confidentiality concerns, a general description or categorisation of these third parties would be beneficial. For instance, are these third parties external consultants, other government agencies, private entities, or individuals outside the SES Officers mentioned in my request?
2. Role and Involvement of Third Parties: Could you please elaborate on how these third parties fit into the scope of my request? My request primarily concerns communications between specific Senior Executive Service (SES) Officers and the Provisional Improvement Notice's broader context. Therefore, understanding these third parties' roles and involvement in these communications or the Provisional Improvement Notice's issuance and handling would be extremely helpful.
3. Impact on the Information Requested: Lastly, I would like to understand how the involvement of these third parties might affect the information I have requested. Will their involvement potentially lead to redactions or exclusions in the documents provided? If so, please explain the rationale behind these redactions or exclusions.
Your clarification on these points will help me make an informed decision about providing consent for disclosing my identity. Understanding these aspects is crucial for maintaining transparency and trust in this process.
I appreciate your assistance and look forward to your prompt response.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
-----Original Message-----
Good afternoon Mr Chapman,
This email is in relation to your current FOI request with the NDIS
Commission (FOI ref: FOI Request No 48).
Third Party Consultation Required
The purpose of this email is to inform you that the NDIS Commission has
conducted a search for documents that fall within the scope of your FOI
request and that search has located documents that contain information of
a business and/or personal nature of a third party. A third party is a
person or business that is not yourself as the applicant of the FOI
request to the NDIS Commission, or the Commission itself.
Sections 27 (business documents) and 27A (documents affecting personal
privacy) of the FOI Act require that I consider whether third parties
identified in documents might reasonably wish to make an exemption
contention because of business information in a document.
I have reviewed the documents that fall within the scope of your FOI
request and I have formed the view that certain third parties identified
in the documents might reasonably wish to make a submission on the release
of their business and/or personal information.
As such, the Commission must consult the third parties before an access
decision is made. Under section 15(6)(a), the Commission is granted an
additional 30 days to process the request. Your decision, as a result, is
now due on 2 August 2023.
Confidentiality
The NDIS Commission cannot disclose your identity to third parties
identified for consultation without your consent. Could you please advise
if you consent to the NDIS Commission providing your identity as the FOI
Applicant to third parties being consulted on your FOI request?
Next steps
Please provide your response to the above question regarding your identity
by COB Friday 23 June 2023.
If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to get in contact
with the FOI team at [1][NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email].
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
[2]cid:image001.jpg@01D41218.BD3EEDC0
E: [3][email address]
[4]www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures,
and to elders both past and present.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #10361 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FOI Officer,
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 - Sect 27, which outlines the consultation process for business documents, I find it necessary to seek further clarification on the involvement of "third parties" in the context of my request. The previous response, rather than addressing my questions directly, has left several aspects of the matter unclear and has raised additional questions.
My request is specifically tailored to focus on communications between specific Senior Executive Service (
Officers and the broader context of the Provisional Improvement Notice. The involvement of a third party in this context is not immediately discernible. My request does not appear to align with the categories outlined in Sect 27(2) of the Act, which pertains to information about a person's business or professional affairs or the business, commercial, or financial affairs of an organisation or undertaking.
As per Sect 27(1) of the Act, consultation with a third party is required when a request is made for access to a document containing business information about a person, organisation, or undertaking, and it appears that the person or organisation might reasonably wish to contend that the document is exempt under section 47 or conditionally exempt under section 47G. Given the specific nature of my request, I am unclear how this provision applies.
I want to clarify that the automatic publication of these communications on the Right to Know website and the association of my name with them is not relevant to the issue at hand.
In light of the above, I require comprehensive responses to the following questions:
1. How does the involvement of these third parties comply with the provisions of Sect 27 of the FOI Act?
2. What is the specific nature of the business information necessitates their consultation as per Sect 27(2) of the Act?
3. Are these third parties directly involved in the communications or the issuance and handling of the Provisional Improvement Notice? If so, in what capacity?
4. How might the involvement of these third parties impact the information I have requested? Will their involvement potentially lead to redactions or exclusions in the documents provided? If so, what is the rationale behind these redactions or exclusions in line with the exemptions provided under Part IV of the FOI Act?
5. Will I be informed of the identity of the third party or parties involved in this consultation process, as per Sect 27(6) of the FOI Act? Will I be made aware of any contentions or objections they may raise?
6. If these third parties raise objections, how will these objections be addressed and resolved under Sect 27(4) of the Act?
7. How will the resolution of these objections impact the information I have requested?
Once I have enough information to make an informed decision about disclosing my identity, I may agree. However, this decision will be made based on the responses to the above questions and a clear understanding of the implications of such disclosure.
Given the substantial public interest in the governance and operational conduct of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, my request must be handled in a manner that upholds the principles of transparency and clarity, as enshrined in the FOI Act. The public has a right to know how such important matters are handled, and I am committed to upholding this right.
Im looking forward to your prompt and comprehensive response that adheres to the principles and provisions of the FOI Act.
Ace Chapman
Thank you for emailing the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
This inbox is monitored between 9 am and 5 pm (AEST), Monday to Friday and
we will respond to your enquiry within 5 business days.
Alternatively you can contact us on 1800 035 544, or visit the website at
[1]www.ndiscommission.gov.au for information and resources.
This is an automated email. Please do not respond.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Good afternoon Mr Chapman,
Thank you for your response.
Consultation process
We note that your correspondence primarily seeks clarification in respect of aspects of the operation of the FOI Act. I note the Commission is unable to provide legal advice. The OAIC publishes guidance for agencies and applicants in the form of the FOI guidelines, and includes useful information relating to consultation processes under the Act.
The guidelines can be located at: https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
We suggest you seek external legal advice if you are seeking further clarification of the FOI process beyond that available in the guidelines.
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [email address]
www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders both past and present.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Chapman <[FOI #10361 email]>
Sent: Thursday, 22 June 2023 1:29 PM
To: FOI (NDIS Commission) <[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]>
Subject: RE: Your FOI request - Notice of Extension of Time due to Consultation [SEC=OFFICIAL]
FOI Officer,
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 - Sect 27, which outlines the consultation process for business documents, I find it necessary to seek further clarification on the involvement of "third parties" in the context of my request. The previous response, rather than addressing my questions directly, has left several aspects of the matter unclear and has raised additional questions.
My request is specifically tailored to focus on communications between specific Senior Executive Service (
Officers and the broader context of the Provisional Improvement Notice. The involvement of a third party in this context is not immediately discernible. My request does not appear to align with the categories outlined in Sect 27(2) of the Act, which pertains to information about a person's business or professional affairs or the business, commercial, or financial affairs of an organisation or undertaking.
As per Sect 27(1) of the Act, consultation with a third party is required when a request is made for access to a document containing business information about a person, organisation, or undertaking, and it appears that the person or organisation might reasonably wish to contend that the document is exempt under section 47 or conditionally exempt under section 47G. Given the specific nature of my request, I am unclear how this provision applies.
I want to clarify that the automatic publication of these communications on the Right to Know website and the association of my name with them is not relevant to the issue at hand.
In light of the above, I require comprehensive responses to the following questions:
1. How does the involvement of these third parties comply with the provisions of Sect 27 of the FOI Act?
2. What is the specific nature of the business information necessitates their consultation as per Sect 27(2) of the Act?
3. Are these third parties directly involved in the communications or the issuance and handling of the Provisional Improvement Notice? If so, in what capacity?
4. How might the involvement of these third parties impact the information I have requested? Will their involvement potentially lead to redactions or exclusions in the documents provided? If so, what is the rationale behind these redactions or exclusions in line with the exemptions provided under Part IV of the FOI Act?
5. Will I be informed of the identity of the third party or parties involved in this consultation process, as per Sect 27(6) of the FOI Act? Will I be made aware of any contentions or objections they may raise?
6. If these third parties raise objections, how will these objections be addressed and resolved under Sect 27(4) of the Act?
7. How will the resolution of these objections impact the information I have requested?
Once I have enough information to make an informed decision about disclosing my identity, I may agree. However, this decision will be made based on the responses to the above questions and a clear understanding of the implications of such disclosure.
Given the substantial public interest in the governance and operational conduct of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, my request must be handled in a manner that upholds the principles of transparency and clarity, as enshrined in the FOI Act. The public has a right to know how such important matters are handled, and I am committed to upholding this right.
Im looking forward to your prompt and comprehensive response that adheres to the principles and provisions of the FOI Act.
Ace Chapman
-----Original Message-----
Good morning Mr Chapman,
Thank you for your response.
Just to clarify, we are requesting your consent for the Commission to identify you as the applicant to the third-party in consultations regarding third-party documents. For the avoidance of doubt, (with your consent) we propose disclosing to the third-party during consultation a statement to the effect ‘that Ace Chapman is the FOI applicant of this request’. Notwithstanding your request and correspondence is automatically published on the Right to Know website, we are still required to seek your consent before disclosing applicant’s identity to a third-party.
If you do not wish for us to disclose ‘Ace Chapman’ as the applicant during consultations, we would refrain from doing so and would continue to consult the third party in respect of relevant documents without identifying you, Ace Chapman, as the applicant.
The FOI Guidelines at [3.40] provide:
"An applicant’s identity should not be provided to any third party without prior consultation and agreement by the applicant. This also applies if there is a request consultation process under ss 26A, 27 or 27A or if another agency is consulted. Nevertheless, knowing an applicant’s identity may help a third party decide more easily whether to object to disclosure and to frame any specific objections, and this issue can be raised with an applicant in consultation."
I trust this assists and please don’t hesitate if you have any questions. We would be grateful for a response by COB 26 June 2023.
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [email address]
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to elders both past and present.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #10361 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear FOI Officer,
I am writing to express my concern and dissatisfaction with the commission's latest communication regarding my request under the Freedom of Information Act 1982. I must clarify that my intention was not to seek "legal advice." Instead, my objective was to obtain basic de-identified information that would enable me to make an informed decision regarding the release of my identity. This is a reasonable and justified request, especially considering that the third party involved would know my identity.
Throughout this process, I have been nothing but accommodating. I have been amenable to changing the scope of my request when suggested and have constructively raised valid questions and concerns. My engagement with the commission has been in good faith, with the expectation of transparency and clarity in return.
However, the commission's response has lacked transparency and clarity, and it is evident that my legitimate concerns have not been adequately addressed. The involvement of a third party remains ambiguous, and the commission's response has been woefully inadequate.
One of the purposes of this Freedom of Information request was to either substantiate or dispel concerns regarding the commission's management that have been reported in the media. However, the commission's handling of this request, characterized by obfuscation and a lack of transparency, is proving these concerns rather than addressing them.
I want to emphasize that this is not a joke but regarding alleged serious health and safety issues that warrant utmost seriousness and diligence.
As such, I really insist detailed and unambiguous responses to the questions previously outlined. I must emphasize the seriousness of this matter and the public interest in the governance and operational conduct of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
I am setting a firm deadline for a sufficient response to my concerns. I expect a comprehensive and satisfactory reply by the close of business next Friday, 7 July 2023. Failure to provide a satisfactory response by this deadline will leave me with no alternative but to escalate this matter to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner for review. I will also bring the commission's attempts to obfuscate and derail this Freedom of Information request to the attention of the NDIS Minister by cc'ing them in this correspondence.
The commission must uphold the transparency, clarity, and accountability principles of the Freedom of Information Act. The commission's actions in this process should reflect these principles. I urge the commission to treat this matter with the gravity it deserves and to provide a prompt, comprehensive, and unequivocal response.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
Thank you for emailing the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
This inbox is monitored between 9 am and 5 pm (AEST), Monday to Friday and
we will respond to your enquiry within 5 business days.
Alternatively you can contact us on 1800 035 544, or visit the website at
[1]www.ndiscommission.gov.au for information and resources.
This is an automated email. Please do not respond.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Dear Ace Chapman
Thank you for your email.
Further to our previous correspondence of 22 June 2023 (attached), the FOI
Guidelines at [3.40] provide:
"An applicant’s identity should not be provided to any third party without
prior consultation and agreement by the applicant. This also applies if
there is a request consultation process under ss 26A, 27 or 27A or if
another agency is consulted. Nevertheless, knowing an applicant’s identity
may help a third party decide more easily whether to object to disclosure
and to frame any specific objections, and this issue can be raised with an
applicant in consultation."
Accordingly, in the absence of having received your consent to disclose
your identity by 26 June 2023 as requested, and to ensure the Commission
meets its statutory deadlines, we will proceed with the consultation
process while not identifying you as the applicant.
Please note that if you’re not happy with the way an agency has handled an
FOI request, it is open to you to lodge a complaint in the following
manner -
Complaints to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and
Commonwealth Ombudsman
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
You may complain to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
concerning action taken by an Agency in the exercise of powers or the
performance of functions under the FOI Act, There is no fee for making a
complaint. A complaint to the Australian Information Commissioner must be
made in writing.
The Australian Information Commissioner's contact details are:
· Telephone: 1300 363 992
· Website: [1]www.oaic.gov.au
Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may also complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman concerning action
taken by an Agency in the exercise of powers or the performance of
functions under the FOI Act. There is no fee for making a complaint. A
complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman may be made in person, by
telephone or in writing.
The Commonwealth Ombudsman's contact details are:
· Phone: 1300 362 072
· Website: [2]www.ombudsman.gov.au
Kind regards
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [3][email address]
[4]www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures,
and to elders both past and present.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Chapman <[FOI #10361 email]>
Sent: Friday, 30 June 2023 2:52 PM
To: FOI (NDIS Commission) <[NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission request email]>
Subject: RE: Your FOI request - Notice of Extension of Time due to
Consultation [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Dear FOI Officer,
I am writing to express my concern and dissatisfaction with the
commission's latest communication regarding my request under the Freedom
of Information Act 1982. I must clarify that my intention was not to seek
"legal advice." Instead, my objective was to obtain basic de-identified
information that would enable me to make an informed decision regarding
the release of my identity. This is a reasonable and justified request,
especially considering that the third party involved would know my
identity.
Throughout this process, I have been nothing but accommodating. I have
been amenable to changing the scope of my request when suggested and have
constructively raised valid questions and concerns. My engagement with the
commission has been in good faith, with the expectation of transparency
and clarity in return.
However, the commission's response has lacked transparency and clarity,
and it is evident that my legitimate concerns have not been adequately
addressed. The involvement of a third party remains ambiguous, and the
commission's response has been woefully inadequate.
One of the purposes of this Freedom of Information request was to either
substantiate or dispel concerns regarding the commission's management that
have been reported in the media. However, the commission's handling of
this request, characterized by obfuscation and a lack of transparency, is
proving these concerns rather than addressing them.
I want to emphasize that this is not a joke but regarding alleged serious
health and safety issues that warrant utmost seriousness and diligence.
As such, I really insist detailed and unambiguous responses to the
questions previously outlined. I must emphasize the seriousness of this
matter and the public interest in the governance and operational conduct
of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.
I am setting a firm deadline for a sufficient response to my concerns. I
expect a comprehensive and satisfactory reply by the close of business
next Friday, 7 July 2023. Failure to provide a satisfactory response by
this deadline will leave me with no alternative but to escalate this
matter to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner for
review. I will also bring the commission's attempts to obfuscate and
derail this Freedom of Information request to the attention of the NDIS
Minister by cc'ing them in this correspondence.
The commission must uphold the transparency, clarity, and accountability
principles of the Freedom of Information Act. The commission's actions in
this process should reflect these principles. I urge the commission to
treat this matter with the gravity it deserves and to provide a prompt,
comprehensive, and unequivocal response.
Yours sincerely,
Ace Chapman
-----Original Message-----
Good afternoon Mr Chapman,
Thank you for your response.
Consultation process
We note that your correspondence primarily seeks clarification in respect
of aspects of the operation of the FOI Act. I note the Commission is
unable to provide legal advice. The OAIC publishes guidance for agencies
and applicants in the form of the FOI guidelines, and includes useful
information relating to consultation processes under the Act.
The guidelines can be located at:
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
We suggest you seek external legal advice if you are seeking further
clarification of the FOI process beyond that available in the guidelines.
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
E: [email address]
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures,
and to elders both past and present.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #10361 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This
message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet.
More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
1. http://www.oaic.gov.au/
2. http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/
Dear Ace Chapman,
Thank you for your FOI request.
Please find attached the Notice of Decision and relevant documents.
Kind regards,
FOI Team
Legal Services and Internal Integrity Division
[1]cid:image001.jpg@01D41218.BD3EEDC0
E: [2][email address]
[3]www.ndiscommission.gov.au
The NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission acknowledges the traditional
owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to
land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures,
and to elders both past and present.
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/