Dear Department of Veterans' Affairs,

Alan Ashmore asked DVA to provide the number of received requests for opt out of Veterans’ MATES since its start in 2004 to 30 November 2023, which DVA provided (1,183 opt outs received by DVA) in decision LEX 62634.

I would like to request the same “document created in accordance with section 17 of the FOI Act” as in LEX 62634, but with an added column to that report listing the number of opt outs that were done (actioned/processed/etc) so people can compare the number of opt outs received to those opted out for each time period.

Given the number of Right to Know requests about this MATES program by a number of different individuals, with a number of media outlets having reported on this program and this issue of opt outs, there is clearly a public interest in this information so please make sure it is provided in the same manner as was done for LEX 62634.

Yours faithfully,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

As this FOI isn’t due until late January I consider it too early to make extension of time requests.

I would be willing to give an extension of time if necessary if you ask me in January when you know that will be the only extension of time sought.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

Can you please advise:

a) what was the source record/s for the completion of an opt out (where was this information recorded, and in what form); and

b) whether the number of opt out processed for each calendar year was for the opt outs received in the same calendar year (or month, for the 2023 month breakdown) as I requested these numbers in the FOI to be for the same time period.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

In response to the question as to what documents you obtained these number of processed opt out from these fortnightly and monthly disclosures of identified medical information by DVA to UniSA you say “the Department's Program Delivery team had extracted data from the Department's staff management system”.

Unfortunately that is a very vague response, which really does not make anything clearer as to what was the source record for those numbers was.

Perhaps it would help if you could outline what happened, administratively, when the Department received a request for someone to be opted out of the fortnightly/monthly disclosures of personal information from DVA to UniSA for the MATES program.

So what did the Department do administratively to opt out that individual from those disclosures and how was that recorded? Why would that information be recorded in a “staff management system” as that sounds like something used for personnel management, not departmental record keeping?

As for the second part of your response, if that was the case, there should not be identical numbers for all years prior to 2023 as to opt outs received and opt outs processed as there is a high profile case that was the subject of an Information Commissioner determination about such an opt out from such disclosures to UniSA who was not opted out until many years after that opt out was communicated to the Department. I have seen a partial copy of a written submission made by the Department’s General Counsel in late 2020 to the Information Commissioner that stated that the Department was not under any obligation to opt out anyone from these MATES disclosures so given this it is not possible that all opt outs received between those years were opted out, as senior Department officials are on record refusing to opt out individuals because they argued consent was not required to continue disclosing their sensitive medical information to UniSA.

I am just trying to understand the cause of this significant discrepancy and what original records these processed opt out numbers came from, to try and explain this discrepancy.

So if you can please provide the information requested that will help greatly to determine the source of the mistake that has been made.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

A fortnight ago I asked the following, but still have not received a response:

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

In response to the question as to what documents you obtained these number of processed opt out from these fortnightly and monthly disclosures of identified medical information by DVA to UniSA you say “the Department's Program Delivery team had extracted data from the Department's staff management system”.

Unfortunately that is a very vague response, which really does not make anything clearer as to what was the source record for those numbers was.

Perhaps it would help if you could outline what happened, administratively, when the Department received a request for someone to be opted out of the fortnightly/monthly disclosures of personal information from DVA to UniSA for the MATES program.

So what did the Department do administratively to opt out that individual from those disclosures and how was that recorded? Why would that information be recorded in a “staff management system” as that sounds like something used for personnel management, not departmental record keeping?

As for the second part of your response, if that was the case, there should not be identical numbers for all years prior to 2023 as to opt outs received and opt outs processed as there is a high profile case that was the subject of an Information Commissioner determination about such an opt out from such disclosures to UniSA who was not opted out until many years after that opt out was communicated to the Department. I have seen a partial copy of a written submission made by the Department’s General Counsel in late 2020 to the Information Commissioner that stated that the Department was not under any obligation to opt out anyone from these MATES disclosures so given this it is not possible that all opt outs received between those years were opted out, as senior Department officials are on record refusing to opt out individuals because they argued consent was not required to continue disclosing their sensitive medical information to UniSA.

I am just trying to understand the cause of this significant discrepancy and what original records these processed opt out numbers came from, to try and explain this discrepancy.

So if you can please provide the information requested that will help greatly to determine the source of the mistake that has been made.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Can you please clarify your response, as it does not match up.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

A month ago I asked DVA:

“In response to the question as to what documents you obtained these number of processed opt out from these fortnightly and monthly disclosures of identified medical information by DVA to UniSA you say “the Department's Program Delivery team had extracted data from the Department's staff management system”.

Unfortunately that is a very vague response, which really does not make anything clearer as to what was the source record for those numbers was.

Perhaps it would help if you could outline what happened, administratively, when the Department received a request for someone to be opted out of the fortnightly/monthly disclosures of personal information from DVA to UniSA for the MATES program.

So what did the Department do administratively to opt out that individual from those disclosures and how was that recorded? Why would that information be recorded in a “staff management system” as that sounds like something used for personnel management, not departmental record keeping?

As for the second part of your response, if that was the case, there should not be identical numbers for all years prior to 2023 as to opt outs received and opt outs processed as there is a high profile case that was the subject of an Information Commissioner determination about such an opt out from such disclosures to UniSA who was not opted out until many years after that opt out was communicated to the Department. I have seen a partial copy of a written submission made by the Department’s General Counsel in late 2020 to the Information Commissioner that stated that the Department was not under any obligation to opt out anyone from these MATES disclosures so given this it is not possible that all opt outs received between those years were opted out, as senior Department officials are on record refusing to opt out individuals because they argued consent was not required to continue disclosing their sensitive medical information to UniSA.

I am just trying to understand the cause of this significant discrepancy and what original records these processed opt out numbers came from, to try and explain this discrepancy.

So if you can please provide the information requested that will help greatly to determine the source of the mistake that has been made.”

A fortnight ago I followed this up and got no reply still.

Given the recent and numerous adverse media reporting of DVA’s conduct in breaching both ethical and privacy obligations in the MATES program I would have thought you would be doing your upmost to show you have nothing to hide. Please give answers to my request for clarification.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny

Dear INFORMATION.ACCESS,

Another month and still nothing from DVA. This conduct by DVA is disgraceful. DVA are intentionally sticking up two fingers to the FOI Act by behaving this way. A very poor look.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny