This person's Freedom of Information requests (approximately 109)
(page 4)
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Ms Pane
1. Thank you for your email dated 15 April 2018, asking for an internal review o...
Thank you. You can close this FOI now.
Yours sincerely,
Verity Pane
Whoops, restated this application that you are already fraudulently stalling.
Yours faithfully,
Verity Pane
I can’t say thank for your decision, the reasons for which given were ridiculously opaque.
“Upon internal review, I sought a sample of the documen...
Defence continues to show it is a bad faith actor that systemically abuses the aims and objectives of the Freedom of Information Act, and the irony...
It beggars belief that of the only 3 full or mostly full pages released (all of which are already in the public domain), against 95 pages either rem...
Thank you - the information provided helps give context to the time taken by the Department (it may have been unfair otherwise to assess impact/resp...
I’ve marked this partial for two reasons:
1) Firstly, this information should have been provided a month ago with the original FOI decision, but was u...
The subsequent FOI the OAIC forced me to put in, after unethically and unlawfully redacting relevant information for which no consent was given to reda...
Thank you for this overdue response. It is interesting to note that the claim of national security exemptions in the decision letter (although I hav...
I’ve marked this FOI partially successful given it would seem an abuse to infer this FOI was handled correctly, given the appalling behaviour of Jo Gra...
First your department claims it’s own DVA UCC manual couldn’t be released because it was “under review” (and there was no claim made you were review...
UNCLASSIFIED
Thank you Verity.
Thank you for your decision, and your decision to waive the charges initially sought, which is consistent with the s 93A Guidelines issued by the Au...
Thank you for your decision today, and all your documents did come through the first time (including the SOR). No further action required, you may n...
Dear Ms Pane
A decision on your FOI request is attached, as are the documents you
requested.
Regards
Raewyn Harlock | Assistant...
On 1 June 2017, under FOIREQ17/00036, I made a valid FOI Request (administrative access sought in the first instance, but to be treated as an FOI Ap...
Dear Ms Pane,
Please find attached the document in question.
Kind regards,
Alexander Gent
Legal Officer
Information Law
Legal Services & Assurance B...
Dear Ms Pane,
I am writing to provide you with my decision on your Internal Review application for your FOI request relating to the Information Commis...
I agree with the applicant; the response from the agency was very informative. Also, it was prompt, and managed administratively without the machinery...
Thank you for the background information. I am satisfied with the response here that no documents exist as the OAIC (in its current form) has never...
I make this note only for a purpose to make something clear to other users of Right to Know. In the first email the applicant mentions "s 17 FOI reques...
Thank you for your response (although I am unsure why a copy of the Unacceptable Behaviour Defence Instruction was included, given it has no relevan...
Thank you for your decision, the information provided is quite useful, and will be a beneficial aid to interpretation when the Australian National A...
For the interest of others, who may be refused access to information, on claims of unreasonable disclosure of the personal information of others, it ma...
This person's 164 annotations
(page 4)
The result of this requester’s internal review is that the Department have released one further document, being essentially a Ministerial Advice templa...
As stated in the agency’s response “I will have to refuse your FOI request as 'practical refusal reasons' exist in relation to it.”
The requester did...
Dear Mr Hirsch,
I am sorry RtK account Stephanie Johnson left a sarcastic comment about your personal decision, which is quite valid, not to give con...
It’s taken over two months to effectively get nothing - and even that which has been partially marked for release is so censored that it may as well be...
With the charges being reduced to $60 and therefore even further below the threshold the Information Commissioner has generally regarded as not suffici...
Hi Adam, an estimated charge of $90 is generally considered by the Information Commissioner in the range of charges where the costs of calculation and...
I’ve marked this partial for two reasons:
1) Firstly, this information should have been provided a month ago with the original FOI decision, but was u...
The subsequent FOI the OAIC forced me to put in, after unethically and unlawfully redacting relevant information for which no consent was given to reda...
I’ve marked this FOI partially successful given it would seem an abuse to infer this FOI was handled correctly, given the appalling behaviour of Jo Gra...
The behaviour of Jo Graves here is, in short, disgusting and a gross breach of ethics, and demonstrates that Defence’s FOI area is a repeat offender an...
On 5 October 2017, I made an FOI application to the OAIC for a small number of documents, which should have been acknowledged within 14 days (s 15(5)(a...
Agencies continue to use practical refusal notifications poorly.
When correctly done, a practical refusal consultation will seek to assist the applic...
The claim by this agency that “and that the FOI Act does not require an agency to create new documents containing the information that is sought” is mi...
These considerable delays suffered by the applicant, due to PM&C claiming (and laying blame for delays on) consultations with foreign attendees shows P...
Also worth noting that the previous FOI that these documents were within scope of, before I split the FOI to get around the onerous charges Defence tri...
Yet again DVA continues with this fiction that the manual they originally claimed couldn’t be released because it was under “review”, then later claime...
Given the recent previous Public Service Commissioner’s hostility to FOI laws, this ridiculous charges assessment by the APSC is no surprise http://www...
This claim that information provided in receipts and invoices sought would satisfy s 27A, which generally only applies to sensitive commercial informat...
As the OAIC has not provided the documents requested by the statutory deadline (s 15(5)(b)) and when it did provide them exceeded the scope of consent...
I note that Melissa Davidson from Defence has tempered her original response, following your raising of the access the Defence FOI area has to all of O...
I note that Melissa Davidson from Defence has tempered her original response, following your raising of the access the Defence FOI area has to all of O...
This agency’s conduct here is best described as high farce - first the document exists, then it doesn’t, then when part of it is found on a public webs...
Hi Adam,
A recent decision of the Information Commissioner ('MK' and Department of Defence (Freedom of information) [2017] AICmr 89 (15 September 20...
Hi Adam,
A recent decision of the Information Commissioner might assist here.
Defence’s FOI area confirmed that they can search the entire store, o...
A ridiculous charges assessment, of an excessive decision making time calculation, that deserves upmost criticism.
Unfortunately it’s also a stunt pu...