faulker03

The Attorney General is to appeal the Tribunal decision against his office handed down by Justice Jagot in December and the subject of three posts here earlier in the week.  No surprise, the appeal to the Federal Court is "in the public interest" according to a spokeswoman for Senator Brandis, quoted in Fairfax : "the tribunal's findings had "wide-ranging implications for the FOI system. Accordingly, it is in the public interest that there be judicial clarification of how the FOI system operates," she said. Senator Brandis' lawyers will argue that Justice Jagot "erred" by not deciding that FOI decision makers needed to consult all third parties named in diary entries, where "there was some prospect that such an entry might be exempt [from disclosure]," court documents say. Not sure how the appeal advances the Attorney General's concern expressed before Christmas that "as a general rule minister's diaries ought not ...

The third of three related posts . Justice J agot in Dreyfus and Attorney General (Commonwealth of Australia) [2015] AATA 995 found the t he Office of the Attorney General got it wrong in refusing to process a F reedom of Information a pplication for the AG's appointments diary .     Of course the office involved isn't just any ministerial office.  It's the office of the minister with overall responsibility for administration of the Freedom of Information Act. And the Attorney G eneral has plans before Parliament that if passed would see him play a bigger role in guiding other ministers, agencies and the tribunal on interpretation and application of the act. The Attorney General's initial and so far as I have seen only response to the decision is that he opposes release of ministerial diaries as a matter of principle: "Let's be clear that the principle that I was upholding is the same principle Mr Dreyfus when he was a minister in the previous...

In the House of Representatives yesterday Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, ALP) moved: That this House: (1) expresses concern at the culture of secrecy prevalent in the Government and the serious undermining of the core principles enshrined in the freedom of information legislation; (2) notes the Government has: (a) defunded the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) despite failing to pass its legislation to abolish the office; and (b) failed to advance Australia's application for the Open Government Partnership (OGP); and (3) calls on the Government to abandon its attack on the OAIC and provide it with proper funding, and recommit to joining the OGP. The motion didn't get far in the 10 minutes allocated before debate was adjourned with Mactiernan and L abor Party colleague Graham Perrett the only speakers. Could the lack of interest or appetite on government benches to contest the argument suggest a decision not to waste time defending the indefensible while re...

The Sydney Morning Herald and other media are enjoying the Freedom of Information battle in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal between the former Attorney General Mark Dreyfus and his successor Senator George Brandis over access to the current attorney's appointments diary for an eight month period in 2013-14.   Me too when I sat through the three hour hearing in Sydney this morning. But none of us enjoyed it more than Dreyfus. Dreyfus QC who represented himself and giving the lie to that old maxim, a lawyer who does so has a fool for a client, had a n enjoyable morning drawing on years of knowledge of   FOI law gained at the bar in his pre-parliament years and experience since in ministerial positions . Dreyfus was masterly in making submissions and putting Brandis Chief of Staff Paul O'Sullivan through the hoops.  O'Sullivan by the wa y didn't seem to enjoy it at all.  P aul F arrell in The Guardian provides a detailed report of proceedings. Th...

The post below was published in March and is now republished in light of reports today that Prime Minister Turnbull continues to use non government messaging services. And isn't alone, as a spokesman explained: "Many MPs and Ministers use private messaging systems — including SMS, WhatsApp, Wickr, etc and private emails etc — for non-sensitive material for reasons of convenience and superior functionality," the spokesman said."All communications or records of a minister which relate to his or her duties are [subject to many exemptions] potentially subject to Freedom of Information whether it is on SMS, a private email server or a Government email server. "The majority of Government correspondence is routine and of a non-sensitive nature and is therefore not subject to sensitive security markings." ............................................................................................................... Australian angles arising from Hillary Cli...