Synergy Group Australia report recommendation to spend no more than 5 minutes reviewing IC Review requests

Julie made this Freedom of Information request to Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

Dear Office of the Australian Information Commissioner,

For the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act, I seek copy of any document regarding the recommendation of Synergy Group Australia, an external consultant contracted by the Information Commissioner to process review and workshop changes to its processes, that OAIC staff members spend no more than 5 minutes reviewing IC Review requests (before rejecting them for investigation, without using any second stage review process to review such a decision internally before release) in order to reduce the OAIC's backlog of IC Reviews.

Was that recommendation, which was reported by them (from the results of its off-site workshops with OAIC staff), adopted?

Sincerely

Julie

Legal, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

1 Attachment

Our reference: FOIREQ20/00235

Dear Julie

Freedom of Information request

I refer to your request for access to documents made under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (Cth) (the FOI Act) and received by the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) on 7 December 2020.

Scope of your request

In your email you seek access to the following:

“…I seek copy of any document regarding the recommendation of Synergy
Group Australia, an external consultant contracted by the Information
Commissioner to process review and workshop changes to its processes, that
OAIC staff members spend no more than 5 minutes reviewing IC Review
requests (before rejecting them for investigation, without using any
second stage review process to review such a decision internally before
release) in order to reduce the OAIC's backlog of IC Reviews.

 

Was that recommendation, which was reported by them (from the results of
its off-site workshops with OAIC staff), adopted?”

 

Timeframes for dealing with your request

Section 15 of the FOI Act requires this office to process your request no
later than 30 days after the day we receive it. However, section 15(6) of
the FOI Act allows us a further 30 days in situations where we need to
consult with third parties about certain information, such as business
documents or documents affecting their personal privacy. We will notify
you separately if we need to consult a third party.

As we received your request on 7 December 2020, we must process your
request by 6 January 2021.

Disclosure Log

Documents released under the FOI Act may be published online on our
disclosure log, unless they contain personal or business information that
would be unreasonable to publish.

If you would like to discuss this matter, please contact me on my contact
details set out below.

Yours sincerely

 

 

[1][IMG]   Joseph Gouvatsos | Lawyer

Legal Services

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  |  [2]oaic.gov.au

02 8231 4259 |  [3][email address]

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
2. https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
3. mailto:[email address]

Legal, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

4 Attachments

Our reference: FOIREQ20/00235

Dear Julie

Please find attached correspondence relating to your Freedom of
Information request.

Kind regards,

 

[1][IMG]   Joseph Gouvatsos | Lawyer

Legal Services

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001  |  [2]oaic.gov.au

02 8231 4259 |  [3][email address]

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
2. https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlo...
3. mailto:[email address]

Julie left an annotation ()

While the decision states "I have decided to grant you access to that document in full" the document provided was released only in part (with redactions), so this statement made by the delegate is clearly in error.