Current serving stakeholders above the rank of Colonel
Dear Army and Air Force Canteen Service,
Could you please provide the amount of current serving members that have a stake in your company and are above the rank of Colonel or equivalent across all three services.
I look forward to your response,
Wade Timmings
Dear Mr Timmings
I refer to your email of 24 February 2016 where you have asked a number of
questions. Please be advised that the Freedom of Information Act
facilitates access to documents and as such you need to specify the
documents you are requesting (s15(2)(b) refers).
Please note that the FOI Act does not cover access to documents that are
publicly available.
Notwithstanding this, we refer you to the ComLaw website
([1]www.comlaw.gov.au) for our enabling legislation: The Army and Air
Force Canteen Service Regulations 1959.
Regards
AAFCANS | Gallipoli Barracks
Building E11, Lavarack Parade, Enoggera QLD 4051
O: 07 3332 4698 | F: 07 3332 7256
[2]www.aafcans.gov.au
[3]AAFCANS 100Y SIGNATURE
This is a no-reply Mailbox and is not monitored.
IMPORTANT:
This transmission is intended only for the use of the addressee and may
contain confidential or legally privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient of this email, then any use or
dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited.
This email remains the property of the Army and Air Force Canteen Service
and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
delete this email and all copies of it together with all attachments.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/
2. http://www.aafcans.gov.au/
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
The reply from the agency is wrong, unhelpful and silly. So much in so few words! It is wrong because the agency states that the Act does not apply to documents that are publicly available. That is untrue. The Act does not apply (as by the definition of "document" in section 4) to documents that are publicly available and maintained for reference purposes. The fact if a document is publicly available is not enough to put it out of scope of the Act. The publicly available document muse also be maintained (by the agency) for reference purposes.
The reply is unhelpful because it ignores an obligation that the Act sits on an officer of an agency. The officer must help an individual applicant to write his or her application in a way that confirms the requirements of the Act. It is not good enough (and is very very silly) to write "section 15 refers". How does this provide assistance?