Attorney-General Michelle Rowland has been released as saying she plans to bring new legislation. If enacted, this legislation will drastically increase the difficulty in obtaining government documents concerning government deliberations. The first set of changes aim directly at addressing worries about how they process Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Politicians and advocacy groups have argued vigorously over these amendments.
The Albanese government pledges to set a compulsory FOI fee, around $30-$50 for each application. This last step is designed to address vexatious requests. The government has stated these demands have inundated public servants with too many tasks. For the 2023-24 financial year, public servants would spend more than a million hours just processing FOI requests. Regrettably, the bulk of these requests were laden with spam, threats, and nuisances. One individual filed a jaw-dropping 580 FOI requests in just three months. This tsunami of requests temporarily diverted our entire public service team for 3+ months.
Concerns Over Transparency
Critics of the measures say that they would blanketly increase the public’s access to government information. Shadow Attorney-General Julian Leeser put the new input fee as a “truth tax,” adding the chilling effect that it would create on legitimate inquiries. HEAVY HITTERS He wouldn’t comment on other provisions of the bill, saying he hadn’t yet been briefed on them.
Greens justice spokesperson David Shoebridge echoed these concerns, asserting that the changes would “make it even harder to get access to government information.” He challenged the sincerity of the government’s intentions. Instead, he proposed they focus on hiding more information than removing their illegal inefficiencies from the FOI system.
“They’ve looked at the FOI system and decided the problem was you trying to get information and not the secretive departments and ministers that are repeatedly trying to hide it … What are they trying to hide from us this time?” – David Shoebridge
The Albanese government’s commitment to transparency has been under fire in recent months. Critics point to its history of responding to FOI requests and document production orders from opposition and crossbench parliamentarians. They interpret these actions as symptoms of a bigger trend toward a culture of secrecy. Moreover, stakeholders have raised alarm about having to sign non disclosure agreements while policy making.
Government’s Justification
Rowland defended the proposed legislation by framing existing FOI laws as obstacles to “frank and fearless advice from the public service.” She argued that the current framework is outdated, stating that “Freedom of Information is a vital feature of our democratic system … the FOI framework is stuck in the 1980s.” Reforming these laws is critical to fostering a culture of open, honest communication within government agencies, the Attorney-General argues.
Bureaucrats have indicated that existing FOI regulations often lead them to censor their communications with ministers due to fears of publication. This reluctance can prevent good governance and hold back the best possible advice to politicians. By raising fees and restricting access, Rowland aims to remove some of this burden from public servants.
Legislative Outlook
The Albanese government is now preparing to bring the legislation on. It is already going to be a huge challenge to thread the needle of inevitable backlash from other opposition parties and public interest advocates. The proposed transparency measures have opened up one of the most fierce, ongoing battles between transparency advocates and open government, versus government agencies pushing faster and more efficient operations.
