Training / professional development of eSafety Commissioner
Dear eSafety Commissioner,
I wish to make a formal request under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 for documents, or a summary of documents, meeting the following conditions:
* Details of all training, professional development and formal education engaged in by the eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant between her first appointment to the role in January 2017 and the date of this request.
I wish to receive correspondence about this matter through the Right to Know website.
===
The request can be narrowed in the following ways:
* I do not require the names, contact details, identifying information or personal data of any persons, whether within the eSafety Office or elsewhere, except for the names of provider organisations who have delivered training mentioned in the request.
* I do not require the details of any training, professional development or formal education which the eSafety Commissioner does not feel is relevant to her duties as eSafety Commissioner or her suitability or qualification for that role. (I do not need to know if, for example, she has learned to play the piano.)
* I do not require any details of the training OTHER THAN:
- the name of the course or qualification;
- the provider who delivered it;
- the material covered and assessed as part of the training, and the core skills developed (the description of this from the provider should be sufficient);
- the rough dates over which the training occurred, and the rough total number of hours of training (e.g. "eight hours delivered between February and March 2023");
- the nature of the training environment (online, in person in office, or at external provider); and
- whether the Commissioner completed the training and was awarded the relevant certification or qualification.
* I do not require:
- correspondence or receipts regarding booking or attendance at the course;
- course materials or assessments.
===
While the FOI Act technically only permits me to ask for the actual primary documents containing this information, I would be satisfied by a summary of this information, perhaps in the form of a table or spreadsheet, created by your office if that would represent less work for your staff and a clearer summary of the data.
With thanks,
Greg Tannahill
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
I am writing to acknowledge your request under the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 (FOI Act) received on 2 May 2024.
Unless you request otherwise, we will redact the names and personal
information of public servants on relevance grounds pursuant to section 22
of the FOI Act. We will also proceed on the basis that you do not require
duplicates or drafts of material in scope.
The FOI Act allows 30 days for processing your request. This period may be
extended for charges and third-party consultation. We will let you know if
this occurs.
I will contact you at the email address above unless you advise otherwise.
Any documents released to you as part of this decision will be published
on our disclosure log unless one of the relevant exceptions apply. Further
information about the FOI Act, including eSafety’s publication
obligations, is available on our website at
[1]https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/corp....
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[2]eSafety logo Email-Signautre
[3]Email-Footers icons3[4]esafety.gov.au
[5]Email-Footers iconsT[6]Email-Footers iconsF[7]Email-Footers iconsL
eSafety acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and community.
We pay our respects to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and
to Elders past, present and emerging.
Dear FOI Coordinator,
Thank you. I confirm that your understanding regarding scope etc is correct, and await the production of documents.
Yours sincerely,
Greg Tannahill
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
Please find attached a decision and statement of reasons in the above
matter.
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[1]eSafety logo Email-Signautre
[2]Email-Footers icons3[3]esafety.gov.au
[4]Email-Footers iconsT[5]Email-Footers iconsF[6]Email-Footers iconsL
eSafety acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and community.
We pay our respects to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and
to Elders past, present and emerging.
From: FOI <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 12:29 PM
To: Greg Tannahill <[FOI #11381 email]>
Subject: FOI 24120 - Acknowledgement [SEC=OFFICIAL]
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
I am writing to acknowledge your request under the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 (FOI Act) received on 2 May 2024.
Unless you request otherwise, we will redact the names and personal
information of public servants on relevance grounds pursuant to section 22
of the FOI Act. We will also proceed on the basis that you do not require
duplicates or drafts of material in scope.
The FOI Act allows 30 days for processing your request. This period may be
extended for charges and third-party consultation. We will let you know if
this occurs.
I will contact you at the email address above unless you advise otherwise.
Any documents released to you as part of this decision will be published
on our disclosure log unless one of the relevant exceptions apply. Further
information about the FOI Act, including eSafety’s publication
obligations, is available on our website at
[7]https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/corp....
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[8]eSafety logo Email-Signautre
[9]Email-Footers icons3[10]esafety.gov.au
[11]Email-Footers iconsT[12]Email-Footers iconsF[13]Email-Footers iconsL
eSafety acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and community.
We pay our respects to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and
to Elders past, present and emerging.
Dear eSafety,
Thank you for this document, which answers most of my FOI request.
May I please seek a clarification, though?
My FOI specifically requested a summary of the content covered/assessed by the course, and an indication of the number of hours spent completing the course, and information as to how the course was delivered (at a training facility, in office, or online).
Can you advise whether you have not released this information because (a) eSafety does not possess the information, or could not locate it, or (b) you possess the information but rely on an exemption under the Act to withhold it?
It seems implausible that a modern HR department would not have record of this information, especially if eSafety money was used to pay for the course, and if you are unable to produce it easily in summary form then I would be satisfied by the primary documents which contain it. (Such as the documentation from the course provider, or the Commissioner's calendar entries relating to attending the course.)
Yours sincerely,
Greg Tannahill
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
We are making further enquiries with the Commissioner’s Office and will
respond to your e-mail as soon as possible.
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[1]signature_4012186592
[2]signature_1274066324 [3]signature_3751350823
[4]signature_3511698446 [5]signature_578146143
eSafety acknowledges all First Nations people for their continuing care of
everything Country encompasses — land, waters and community. We pay our
respects to First Nations people, and to Elders past, present and future.
Dear eSafety FOI Coordinator,
I'm just following up on my query on this FOI regarding the qualifications of the eSafety Commissioner. As you will recall, my initial request specified that it should contain the time spent in courses, the manner of their delivery, and the subject matter of the course, all of which was omitted from the formal response to the FOI.
You had indicated you were going to chase up this matter and specify whether the material could be provided, or was not held, or was exempt under legislative exemption.
I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
Greg Tannahill
Dear eSafety,
I am again following up on the status of my FOI request relating to training engaged in by the eSafety Commissioner, first emailed to your office on 2 May 2024.
On 3 June 2024 (the final day of the statutory timeframe) you partially answered the FOI, by providing a list of training undertaken and the dates on which it was undertaken.
However, you did not provide any answer to the portion of my FOI requesting:
* the material covered and assessed in the training courses;
* how these courses were delivered (at an external facility, in-house, online); and
* an indication of the number of hours spent in training at each course.
On June 6, you undertook to enquire further into this information, and respond as soon as possible.
However, as of today (19 June), you have not provided me with further correspondence, nor have you either:
(a) provided the documents; or
(b) indicated the documents are not held; or
(c) engaged any legislative extension of the statutory timeframe; or
(d) claimed a statutory exemption to providing the documents.
As a result you are currently in breach of the statutory deadline for responding to this FOI.
Could you please communicate the reason for the delay, and your anticipated timeframe for completing your response to the FOI?
In the ordinary course of public service business, I would expect this information to all be held in a single file by your HR officers, alleviating the need for a lengthy search, and I further note that the request is neither complex nor wide in its scope.
I note that the timeframe provided by the Act for making a decision on an FOI request is, "as soon as practicable, and not later than 30 days", and that it does not comply with the Act to delay a decision to the statutory limit when it could reasonably be made earlier.
With thanks,
Greg Tannahill
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
Thank you for your emails. We apologise for our slower-than-usual response
time as eSafety is presently experiencing a surge in freedom of
information requests.
In response to your emails, we note from the outset that eSafety has
already made a decision on your request. This decision was made on 3 June
2024, within the statutory timeframe prescribed under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (Cth) (FOI Act).
Second, we note that the FOI Act provides a right of access to documents,
not information. Your request did not seek access to documents, you
sought access to the following:
“Details of all training, professional development and formal education
engaged in by the eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant between her first
appointment to the role in January 2017 and the date of this request…
I do not require any details of the training OTHER THAN:
o the name of the course of qualification;
o the provider who delivered it;
o the material covered and assessed as part of the training, and the
core skills developed (the description of this from the provider
should be sufficient);
o the rough dates over which the training occurred, and the rough total
number of hours of training…;
o the nature of the training environment; and
o whether the Commissioner completed the training and was awarded the
relevant certification or qualification.”
As noted in the decision, the information in which you sought access does
not exist in discrete form in documents of eSafety. Therefore, in
accordance with s 17 of the FOI Act, eSafety created a document with
relevant information in order to respond to your request (s 17 document).
Please note there is no obligation on eSafety to create a document in
order to respond to a freedom of information request, if in doing so, it
would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of eSafety from
its other operations (s 17(2)) of the FOI Act).
On 3 June 2024, you sought clarification in respect of the s 17 document,
which was provided to you in full (that is, without any exemptions in the
FOI Act being applied to the information contained in the document). You
wrote:
“My FOI specifically requested a summary of the content covered/assessed
by the course, and an indication of the number of hours spent completing
the course, and information as to how the course was delivered (at a
training facility, in office, or online).
Can you advise whether you have not released this information because (a)
eSafety does not possess the information, or could not locate it, or (b)
you possess the information but rely on an exemption under the Act to
withhold it?”
In the decision, the decision maker noted that it was not possible for the
Commissioner’s Office to confirm the total number of hours of the training
or the nature of the training environment. The decision should have also
stated that such information is not readily available and it was not
possible for the Commissioner’s Office to confirm that information at that
time as in doing so would have substantially and unreasonably diverted the
Commissioner’s Office from its other operations.
Since making the decision, and in the spirit of open and transparent
government, the Commissioner’s Office has been working on confirming the
information (including the “summary of the content covered/assessed by the
course”) so that it can be provided to you. We anticipate being able to
provide you with an update on their progress in the coming days.
Thank you for your patience and ongoing cooperation.
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[1]signature_4012186592
[2]signature_1274066324 [3]signature_3751350823
[4]signature_3511698446 [5]signature_578146143
eSafety acknowledges all First Nations people for their continuing care of
everything Country encompasses — land, waters and community. We pay our
respects to First Nations people, and to Elders past, present and future.
Dear eSafety,
Thank you for your reply.
Obviously I could file a further FOI, in an exhausting form, to obtain the information I require, which might take the form of requesting the Commissioner's diaries, the Office's expenditure on training including procurement processes and receipts, reconciliations of the Commissioner's time against her public service training requirements, et cetera.
Such a request would waste a substantial amount of your Office's time, and likely provide me with far more information than I am actually looking for. I think we would both prefer to avoid it.
I would refer you to 3.210 and following of the OAIC FOI guidelines, and also 3.111 and following, which provide guidance on the quite high standard needed to invoke aa "substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources" exemption.
My confusion comes from the fact that this appears to be training which the Office either procured, paid for, or approved attendance at, and to that extent my understanding is that the Office would be required by law to have kept basic records of the nature of the training. However, if the resolution to the issue is either "the Office was not involved in procuring, paying for or approving this training" or "the Office did not keep appropriate records in accordance with its requirements in relation to this training" then I would accept either of those answers as a resolution of the issue.
In any case, in the interests of not engaging such formal processes, and wasting more of your time than is needed, I look forward to the results of your further enquiries.
With thanks,
Greg Tannahill
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Tannahill
Please see the attached letter of even date.
Kind regards
FOI Coordinator
[1]eSafety logo Email-Signautre
[2]Email-Footers icons3[3]esafety.gov.au
[4]Email-Footers iconsT[5]Email-Footers iconsF[6]Email-Footers iconsL
eSafety acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout
Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters and community.
We pay our respects to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and
to Elders past, present and emerging.
Dear eSafety,
Thank you for this additional data. This fully satisfies my FOI request, and you may close this file.
I offer my thanks for your time and attention in completing this FOI request.
Yours sincerely,
Greg Tannahill