Dear Mr Monceaux

This email is in reference to your application below (FOI 17-62).

The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (the Department) requests your agreement to extend the time period for processing your FOI request by 15 days (FOI Act - s15AA).

The Department will be closed from Monday 26 December to Monday 2 January, 2017 and will reopen for business on Tuesday 3 January 2017.

Your agreement will assist the Department to best respond to your request for access.

Please indicate your agreement by responding to this email.

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601| [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Friday, 16 December 2016 1:23 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project documentation from Regional Development Australia

Dear Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development,

I am writing to request copies of documentation related to the Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project in South Australia, which received Commonwealth funding via the Regional Development Australia Fund circa 2012.

The documentation I am requesting is as follows:

- The Expression of Interest received by RDA
- The grant application as received by RDA
- The grant approval documentation issued by RDA
- Any revisions to the terms and conditions associated with the receipt of Commonwealth funding and the acquittal of the grant
- Final project report and grant acquittal documentation received by RDA

I am making this request under the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 email]

Is [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development? If so, please contact us using this form:
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

I seek clarification in relation to your request (below).

The RDA received the 'Expression of interest' in relation to the 'Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project in South Australia'. The RDA did not receive or create any of the other documents you refer to.

Do you seek this information as received/ issued by the Department or is your interest in the RDA?

Your prompt reply is appreciated.

Kind regards

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
t 02 6274 6495 |
e [email address] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Friday, 16 December 2016 1:23 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project documentation from Regional Development Australia

Dear Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development,

I am writing to request copies of documentation related to the Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project in South Australia, which received Commonwealth funding via the Regional Development Australia Fund circa 2012.

The documentation I am requesting is as follows:

- The Expression of Interest received by RDA
- The grant application as received by RDA
- The grant approval documentation issued by RDA
- Any revisions to the terms and conditions associated with the receipt of Commonwealth funding and the acquittal of the grant
- Final project report and grant acquittal documentation received by RDA

I am making this request under the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 email]

Is [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development? If so, please contact us using this form:
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:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Apologies for the lack of clarity, email is not the always the best medium by which to remove ambiguity.

The only document received (or created) by the RDA is the expression of interest.

If the reference to the RDA is excluded from the scope of your request in the following way, (See below)

- The Expression of Interest received by RDA
- The grant application;
- The grant approval documentation;
- Any revisions to the terms and conditions associated with the receipt of Commonwealth funding and the acquittal of the grant; and
- Final project report and grant acquittal documentation.

Then the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development holds documents relevant to your request.

Should the above revision to the scope of your request meet with your agreement, we can proceed immediately.

Kind regards

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
t 02 6274 6495 |
e [email address] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 January 2017 2:23 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Freedom of Information request - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project documentation from Regional Development Australia [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear FOI Officers,

Thanks for updating me on this request.

Given that the only documentation relevant to my request that appears to be held by RDA is the Expression of Interest, I would like to rescope my Freedom of Information request to focus on this document exclusively.

The project description and funding details listed at http://regional.gov.au/regional/programs... gave the impression that the funding had been applied for and awarded by Regional Development Australia.

Could you please advise me of which department the grant application was received and funded by? This will assist me in redirecting the latter parts of my FoI request.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Dear Mr Monceaux,

I seek clarification in relation to your request (below).

The RDA received the 'Expression of interest' in relation to the 'Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project in South Australia'. The RDA did not receive or create any of the other documents you refer to.

Do you seek this information as received/ issued by the Department or is your interest in the RDA?

Your prompt reply is appreciated.

Kind regards

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance Governance Unit | Corporate Services Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601 t 02 6274 6495 | e [email address] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 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...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux

You have already submitted your request to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.

By way of information, Regional Development Australia (RDA) is a national network of 55 committees made up of local leaders who work with all levels of government, business and community groups to support the development of their regions. It is administered by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.

As it is now clear that you seek the documents regardless of who authored or received them, the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (this Department) will progress your request, without a need for a second request.

Kind regards

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
t 02 6274 6495 |
e [email address] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 January 2017 3:14 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Freedom of Information request - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension project documentation from Regional Development Australia [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear FOI Officers,

Let's proceed with a simpler request, seeking digital copies (scans) of Expression of Interest documentation related to the Lucky Bay Harbor Extension project.

I will direct my request for the additional documentation previously discussed to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, as you have suggested.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Apologies for the lack of clarity, email is not the always the best medium by which to remove ambiguity.

The only document received (or created) by the RDA is the expression of interest.

If the reference to the RDA is excluded from the scope of your request in the following way, (See below)

- The Expression of Interest received by RDA
- The grant application;
- The grant approval documentation;
- Any revisions to the terms and conditions associated with the receipt of Commonwealth funding and the acquittal of the grant; and
- Final project report and grant acquittal documentation.

Then the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development holds documents relevant to your request.

Should the above revision to the scope of your request meet with your agreement, we can proceed immediately.

Kind regards

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance Governance Unit | Corporate Services Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601 t 02 6274 6495 | e [email address] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 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...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux

Charges notice FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project

I refer to your request for access to documents in the possession of the
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (the Department) in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982. 

A determination of your liability to pay a charge and a preliminary
charges estimate is attached.

Should you have any questions regarding the processing of your request
please contact the FOI Officer on (02) 6274 6495 or by email at
[1][email address].

Regards,

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional
Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601| [2]Australian Government,
[Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | Department of Infrastructure
www.infrastructure.gov.au and Regional Development

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and
Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only
and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result
in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on
(02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Charges notice - FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project

I refer to your request for access to documents in the possession of the
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (the Department) in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

A decision on your liability to pay a charge is attached. A Credit Card
Payment Authority form is also attached. Please note that you will need to
respond appropriately to this decision by 25 March 2017, or your request
will be considered withdrawn.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the processing of
your request.

Regards,

Brad Collins

Freedom of Information Officer | Governance and Performance

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development

GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601

e [1][Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | w [2]www.infrastructure.gov.au

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and
Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only
and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result
in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on
(02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email]
2. http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Thank you for your email, and for providing the further articles. I can
confirm that the decision maker did consider whether it would be
appropriate to reduce the charges for your request, but decided not to do
so for the reasons detailed in the decision notice.

Your options at this stage are to pay the charges, to refuse to pay, or to
request an internal review of the charges decision. If you would like to
request an internal review, then the decision to impose charges will be
reviewed by a different decision maker, considering all the material that
you have provided so far. You may also like to provide further
considerations to support your position. In order to help you with this
process, I would like to offer three points that may help to guide you.

The first is that the Office of The Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) offers guidance on what constitutes public interest in the context
of an FOI charge waiver or reduction. Relevantly:

The ‘public interest’ is a concept of wide import that cannot be
exhaustively defined. When considering the public interest, it is
important that the agency or minister directs its attention to the
advancement or the interest or welfare of the public, and this will depend
on each particular set of circumstances. Further, the public interest is
not a static concept confined and defined by strict reference points. […]
[The public interest test will not] be satisfied by a contention that it
is in the public interest for an individual with a special interest in a
document to be granted access to it, or that an underlying premise of the
FOI Act is that transparency is in the public interest.

The OAIC’s website contains further examples of relevant considerations:

[1]https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...

The second point is that you may wish to relate the public interest to the
documents you have requested, rather than the project itself. While you
may be able to establish that there is a public interest in the project,
if you can't demonstrate that the particular documents would provide any
further insight to the project, then you may fail to establish a public
interest in the documents.

The third point is that FOI requests take time and money for the
Department to process. As described in the decision, there is a
significant public interest in both an efficient FOI process and FOI
applicants making a contribution in accordance with the FOI Charges
regulations; in your response, you may wish to establish why the public
interest in this shared financial burden is less important than the public
interest in providing you with access to the documents at a reduced cost.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed, and if you have any
further questions.

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance
Governance Unit | Corporate Services
Department of Infrastructure and Regional
Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
t 02 6274 6495 | [4]Australian Government,
e FOI[2][email address] | w Department of Infrastructure and
[3]www.infrastructure.gov.au Regional Development
[5]Strip

Dear FOI Officers,

In my most recent email to you I wrote "I wish to appeal for a reduction
or waiver of costs, owing to 1) the public interest nature of this request
and 2) the resulting financial hardship the payment of these fees is
likely to cause me."

In your correspondence of 23 February 2017 I noted many written references
to my request for a fee waiver (this is how my request has been
characterised), but only a single mention of my request for the charges to
be reconsidered and potentially reduced (see Reasons for decision #7).

Could you please confirm whether or not the evidence I supplied you was
assessed with respect to both of my requests for either a fee waiver or a
fee reduction?

I am also providing you with some additional news items which further
support my public interest case appeal. This is in response to the
assertion made in your correspondence of 23 February that the media
coverage of the project was not extensive, and was largely constrained to
2016:

5 May 2011:
[6]http://www.theajmonline.com.au/mining_ne...

2 August 2011:
[7]http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/com...

16 August 2011:
[8]http://www.theair.com.au/The_AIR/Lucky_B...

27 April 2012:
[9]http://australianminingreview.com.au/luc...

3 July 2012:
[10]http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012...

4 November 2013:
[11]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/lu...

3 December 2013:
[12]http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/s...

4 December 2013:
[13]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-04/ex...

10 December 2013:
[14]http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story...

December 2013:
[15]https://www.flindersports.com.au/wp-cont...

10 Februrary 2014:
[16]http://www.theaustralian.com.au/mencel-g...

8 March 2016:
[17]https://www.ypct.com.au/index.php/opinio...

10 March 2016:
[18]http://www.farmonline.com.au/story/37816...

1 December 2016:
[19]http://www.5cs.com.au/news/local-news/60...

The inclusion of this additional media coverage extends the supplied media
report evidence to include all years spanning 2011-2016 and represents a
greater diversity of media outlets than I previously provided. It is worth
noting that some of the report which appeared in the Whyalla News (linked
previously) also appeared in other Fairfax papers in South Australia,
including the Stock Journal (which circulates statewide in SA) and the
Eyre Tribune. It is fair to say that interest in this project extends
across Spencer Gulf to communities on both Eyre and Yorke Peninsulas.

As such I would like you to please reconsider reducing the fees associated
with this request on the basis of this now more indicative sample of media
coverage of the Lucky Bay Harbor and its extension works. These articles
raise matters of industrial, environmental and regional economic
significance.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Charges notice - FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project

I refer to your request for access to documents in the possession of the 
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (the Department) in 
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

A decision on your liability to pay a charge is attached. A Credit Card 
Payment Authority form is also attached. Please note that you will need
to  respond appropriately to this decision by 25 March 2017, or your
request  will be considered withdrawn.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the processing of 
your request.

Regards,

Brad Collins

Freedom of Information Officer | Governance and Performance

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development

GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601

e [1][Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email]
| w [2][20]www.infrastructure.gov.au

References

Visible links

1. [21]mailto:[Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
request email]  2. [22]http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/

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

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

[23][FOI #2861 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:

[24]https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and
Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only
and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result
in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on
(02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/
6. http://www.theajmonline.com.au/mining_ne...
7. http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/com...
8. http://www.theair.com.au/The_AIR/Lucky_B...
9. http://australianminingreview.com.au/luc...
10. http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012...
11. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/lu...
12. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/s...
13. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-04/ex...
14. http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story...
15. https://www.flindersports.com.au/wp-cont...
16. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/mencel-g...
17. https://www.ypct.com.au/index.php/opinio...
18. http://www.farmonline.com.au/story/37816...
19. http://www.5cs.com.au/news/local-news/60...
20. http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/
21. mailto:[department
22. http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/
23. mailto:[FOI #2861 email]
24. https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Thank you for your email. We have initiated the internal review process regarding this charges decision, and you can expect to hear back by 26 March 2017.

Regards,

Brad Collins
Freedom of Information Officer | Governance Section
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
e [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Friday, 24 February 2017 6:22 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: RE: FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project - Charges notice [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear FOI Officers,

I wish to request an internal review of the Notice of Charge decision not to reduce or waive the fees associated with this request.

I would you to reconsider points made in my two most recent emails, including the two separate lists of media reports discussing the project in national, regional and specialised publications and broadcasts. I would also like to provide some additional information as further supporting evidence of the Public Interest nature of this request.

It is my understanding that Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula's former Chief Executive Mark Cant played a central role in facilitating the Federal funding which was ultimately provided to support the Lucky Bay harbor extension works.

The funding was issued to the District Council of Franklin Harbor, but the proponent of the development, named on development applications and amendments lodged considered by South Australia's Development Assessment Commission, was Sea Transport Corporation.

Mark Cant left his employment at RDA-WEP in 2013 and was directly employed by Sea Transport as its State Manager. It appears that Mark Cant thus became a financial beneficiary of public funds that he helped administer during his employment at Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula.

Mr Cant's employment history is documented here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-cant-38...

The propriety of Mr Cant's conduct previously prompted legal action undertaken by RDA-WEP against Mr Cant, for making unauthorised payments to his privately owned company, Datum Nominees Pty Ltd. In 2014, The Advertiser reported thus:

"The statement of claim... alleges Mr Cant had a fiduciary duty “not to profit from his position as CEO’’ and had to account to the board “for any profits arising out of opportunities that arise by virtue of being CEO’’ of the board and not to act with a conflict of interest."

Full article here: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south...

The release of this documentation may help to clarify Mr Cant's role in the funding and administration of this project, and thus clarify the extent of his potential conflict of interest.

I have previously asked the department for comment on this, as it pertains to my work as both a public interest researcher and documentary filmmaker.

I thank you for taking the time to reconsider the merits of a fee reduction in support of the Public Interest merits of this request.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Thank you for your email, and for providing the further articles. I can confirm that the decision maker did consider whether it would be appropriate to reduce the charges for your request, but decided not to do so for the reasons detailed in the decision notice.

Your options at this stage are to pay the charges, to refuse to pay, or to request an internal review of the charges decision. If you would like to request an internal review, then the decision to impose charges will be reviewed by a different decision maker, considering all the material that you have provided so far. You may also like to provide further considerations to support your position. In order to help you with this process, I would like to offer three points that may help to guide you.

The first is that the Office of The Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) offers guidance on what constitutes public interest in the context of an FOI charge waiver or reduction. Relevantly:

The ‘public interest’ is a concept of wide import that cannot be exhaustively defined. When considering the public interest, it is important that the agency or minister directs its attention to the advancement or the interest or welfare of the public, and this will depend on each particular set of circumstances. Further, the public interest is not a static concept confined and defined by strict reference points. […] [The public interest test will not] be satisfied by a contention that it is in the public interest for an individual with a special interest in a document to be granted access to it, or that an underlying premise of the FOI Act is that transparency is in the public interest.

The OAIC’s website contains further examples of relevant considerations:

[1]https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...

The second point is that you may wish to relate the public interest to the documents you have requested, rather than the project itself. While you may be able to establish that there is a public interest in the project, if you can't demonstrate that the particular documents would provide any further insight to the project, then you may fail to establish a public interest in the documents.

The third point is that FOI requests take time and money for the Department to process. As described in the decision, there is a significant public interest in both an efficient FOI process and FOI applicants making a contribution in accordance with the FOI Charges regulations; in your response, you may wish to establish why the public interest in this shared financial burden is less important than the public interest in providing you with access to the documents at a reduced cost.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed, and if you have any further questions.

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance Governance Unit | Corporate Services Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601 t 02 6274 6495 | [4]Australian Government, e FOI[2][email address] | w Department of Infrastructure and [3]www.infrastructure.gov.au Regional Development [5]Strip

Dear FOI Officers,

In my most recent email to you I wrote "I wish to appeal for a reduction or waiver of costs, owing to 1) the public interest nature of this request and 2) the resulting financial hardship the payment of these fees is likely to cause me."

In your correspondence of 23 February 2017 I noted many written references to my request for a fee waiver (this is how my request has been characterised), but only a single mention of my request for the charges to be reconsidered and potentially reduced (see Reasons for decision #7).

Could you please confirm whether or not the evidence I supplied you was assessed with respect to both of my requests for either a fee waiver or a fee reduction?

I am also providing you with some additional news items which further support my public interest case appeal. This is in response to the assertion made in your correspondence of 23 February that the media coverage of the project was not extensive, and was largely constrained to
2016:

5 May 2011:
[6]http://www.theajmonline.com.au/mining_ne...

2 August 2011:
[7]http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/com...

16 August 2011:
[8]http://www.theair.com.au/The_AIR/Lucky_B...

27 April 2012:
[9]http://australianminingreview.com.au/luc...

3 July 2012:
[10]http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012...

4 November 2013:
[11]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/lu...

3 December 2013:
[12]http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/s...

4 December 2013:
[13]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-04/ex...

10 December 2013:
[14]http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story...

December 2013:
[15]https://www.flindersports.com.au/wp-cont...

10 Februrary 2014:
[16]http://www.theaustralian.com.au/mencel-g...

8 March 2016:
[17]https://www.ypct.com.au/index.php/opinio...

10 March 2016:
[18]http://www.farmonline.com.au/story/37816...

1 December 2016:
[19]http://www.5cs.com.au/news/local-news/60...

The inclusion of this additional media coverage extends the supplied media report evidence to include all years spanning 2011-2016 and represents a greater diversity of media outlets than I previously provided. It is worth noting that some of the report which appeared in the Whyalla News (linked
previously) also appeared in other Fairfax papers in South Australia, including the Stock Journal (which circulates statewide in SA) and the Eyre Tribune. It is fair to say that interest in this project extends across Spencer Gulf to communities on both Eyre and Yorke Peninsulas.

As such I would like you to please reconsider reducing the fees associated with this request on the basis of this now more indicative sample of media coverage of the Lucky Bay Harbor and its extension works. These articles raise matters of industrial, environmental and regional economic significance.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 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...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Please find attached the decision relating to your request for internal review of the decision to impose charges for your FOI request. The decision was to reduce the amount of charge payable to process your request.

Please note that you will now need to do one of the following:

• Pay the charge or deposit;
• Seek an IC review of the charge; or
• Withdraw your FOI request.

If you have not done one of the above by 26 April 2017 (30 days from today) then your request will be considered withdrawn. I have attached a blank credit card payment authority form for your convenience.

Regards,

Brad Collins
Freedom of Information Officer | Governance Section
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601
e [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: FOI
Sent: Wednesday, 1 March 2017 11:54 AM
To: Dan Monceaux <[FOI #2861 email]>
Subject: RE: FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project - Charges notice [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Thank you for your email. We have initiated the internal review process regarding this charges decision, and you can expect to hear back by 26 March 2017.

Regards,

Brad Collins
Freedom of Information Officer | Governance Section Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601 e [Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development request email] | w www.infrastructure.gov.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Monceaux [mailto:[FOI #2861 email]]
Sent: Friday, 24 February 2017 6:22 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: RE: FOI 17-62 - Lucky Bay Harbour Extension Project - Charges notice [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear FOI Officers,

I wish to request an internal review of the Notice of Charge decision not to reduce or waive the fees associated with this request.

I would you to reconsider points made in my two most recent emails, including the two separate lists of media reports discussing the project in national, regional and specialised publications and broadcasts. I would also like to provide some additional information as further supporting evidence of the Public Interest nature of this request.

It is my understanding that Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula's former Chief Executive Mark Cant played a central role in facilitating the Federal funding which was ultimately provided to support the Lucky Bay harbor extension works.

The funding was issued to the District Council of Franklin Harbor, but the proponent of the development, named on development applications and amendments lodged considered by South Australia's Development Assessment Commission, was Sea Transport Corporation.

Mark Cant left his employment at RDA-WEP in 2013 and was directly employed by Sea Transport as its State Manager. It appears that Mark Cant thus became a financial beneficiary of public funds that he helped administer during his employment at Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula.

Mr Cant's employment history is documented here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-cant-38...

The propriety of Mr Cant's conduct previously prompted legal action undertaken by RDA-WEP against Mr Cant, for making unauthorised payments to his privately owned company, Datum Nominees Pty Ltd. In 2014, The Advertiser reported thus:

"The statement of claim... alleges Mr Cant had a fiduciary duty “not to profit from his position as CEO’’ and had to account to the board “for any profits arising out of opportunities that arise by virtue of being CEO’’ of the board and not to act with a conflict of interest."

Full article here: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south...

The release of this documentation may help to clarify Mr Cant's role in the funding and administration of this project, and thus clarify the extent of his potential conflict of interest.

I have previously asked the department for comment on this, as it pertains to my work as both a public interest researcher and documentary filmmaker.

I thank you for taking the time to reconsider the merits of a fee reduction in support of the Public Interest merits of this request.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

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

Dear Mr Monceaux,

Thank you for your email, and for providing the further articles. I can confirm that the decision maker did consider whether it would be appropriate to reduce the charges for your request, but decided not to do so for the reasons detailed in the decision notice.

Your options at this stage are to pay the charges, to refuse to pay, or to request an internal review of the charges decision. If you would like to request an internal review, then the decision to impose charges will be reviewed by a different decision maker, considering all the material that you have provided so far. You may also like to provide further considerations to support your position. In order to help you with this process, I would like to offer three points that may help to guide you.

The first is that the Office of The Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) offers guidance on what constitutes public interest in the context of an FOI charge waiver or reduction. Relevantly:

The ‘public interest’ is a concept of wide import that cannot be exhaustively defined. When considering the public interest, it is important that the agency or minister directs its attention to the advancement or the interest or welfare of the public, and this will depend on each particular set of circumstances. Further, the public interest is not a static concept confined and defined by strict reference points. […] [The public interest test will not] be satisfied by a contention that it is in the public interest for an individual with a special interest in a document to be granted access to it, or that an underlying premise of the FOI Act is that transparency is in the public interest.

The OAIC’s website contains further examples of relevant considerations:

[1]https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor...

The second point is that you may wish to relate the public interest to the documents you have requested, rather than the project itself. While you may be able to establish that there is a public interest in the project, if you can't demonstrate that the particular documents would provide any further insight to the project, then you may fail to establish a public interest in the documents.

The third point is that FOI requests take time and money for the Department to process. As described in the decision, there is a significant public interest in both an efficient FOI process and FOI applicants making a contribution in accordance with the FOI Charges regulations; in your response, you may wish to establish why the public interest in this shared financial burden is less important than the public interest in providing you with access to the documents at a reduced cost.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed, and if you have any further questions.

FOI Officer | Governance and Performance Governance Unit | Corporate Services Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development GPO Box 594, Canberra ACT 2601 t 02 6274 6495 | [4]Australian Government, e FOI[2][email address] | w Department of Infrastructure and [3]www.infrastructure.gov.au Regional Development [5]Strip

Dear FOI Officers,

In my most recent email to you I wrote "I wish to appeal for a reduction or waiver of costs, owing to 1) the public interest nature of this request and 2) the resulting financial hardship the payment of these fees is likely to cause me."

In your correspondence of 23 February 2017 I noted many written references to my request for a fee waiver (this is how my request has been characterised), but only a single mention of my request for the charges to be reconsidered and potentially reduced (see Reasons for decision #7).

Could you please confirm whether or not the evidence I supplied you was assessed with respect to both of my requests for either a fee waiver or a fee reduction?

I am also providing you with some additional news items which further support my public interest case appeal. This is in response to the assertion made in your correspondence of 23 February that the media coverage of the project was not extensive, and was largely constrained to
2016:

5 May 2011:
[6]http://www.theajmonline.com.au/mining_ne...

2 August 2011:
[7]http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/com...

16 August 2011:
[8]http://www.theair.com.au/The_AIR/Lucky_B...

27 April 2012:
[9]http://australianminingreview.com.au/luc...

3 July 2012:
[10]http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012...

4 November 2013:
[11]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/lu...

3 December 2013:
[12]http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/s...

4 December 2013:
[13]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-04/ex...

10 December 2013:
[14]http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story...

December 2013:
[15]https://www.flindersports.com.au/wp-cont...

10 Februrary 2014:
[16]http://www.theaustralian.com.au/mencel-g...

8 March 2016:
[17]https://www.ypct.com.au/index.php/opinio...

10 March 2016:
[18]http://www.farmonline.com.au/story/37816...

1 December 2016:
[19]http://www.5cs.com.au/news/local-news/60...

The inclusion of this additional media coverage extends the supplied media report evidence to include all years spanning 2011-2016 and represents a greater diversity of media outlets than I previously provided. It is worth noting that some of the report which appeared in the Whyalla News (linked
previously) also appeared in other Fairfax papers in South Australia, including the Stock Journal (which circulates statewide in SA) and the Eyre Tribune. It is fair to say that interest in this project extends across Spencer Gulf to communities on both Eyre and Yorke Peninsulas.

As such I would like you to please reconsider reducing the fees associated with this request on the basis of this now more indicative sample of media coverage of the Lucky Bay Harbor and its extension works. These articles raise matters of industrial, environmental and regional economic significance.

Yours sincerely,

Dan Monceaux

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2861 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...

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.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

This message has been issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the Department on (02) 6274-7111
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections