[Peetwo]

Blatherskite - Episode III

The non-transparent Fort Fumble FOI (non-)disclosure log saga continues...

OFFICIAL


Hi P2

Please find attached disclosure records in relation to the 4 March, 22 April and 2 July 2024 FOI release.

Regards,

Amanda

Amanda Palmer (she/her)

Branch Manager

Communications Branch

CASA\Stakeholder Engagement Division

I went back to Amanda Palmer with this reply:

G'day Amanda,

Thanks for the copies of the FOI publicly released documents as I requested. 

Just a thought but wouldn't it be simpler just to include (like CASA did before) a hyperlink for all copies of CASA documents released under the FOI Act?

Kind regards,

P2

Yesterday I got this reply:

Hi P2 

We’re considering how we manage the disclaimer log going forward and how we can easily publish them. Unfortunately, there is considerable work in making these documents accessible (a requirement of the Disability Act and of all government agencies) which is our current challenge in publishing them more broadly on the website as opposed to releasing them on request. 

Regards,

Amanda

Huh! -

But then the penny dropped when CM got a reply to his 26 July 2024 FOI request in regards to the CASA FOI disclosure log:

..All emails and other internal correspondence, meeting minutes or other notes taken, relating to the decision to remove, and the implementation of the decision to remove, from the CASA FOI Disclosure Log, hyperlinks to copies of documents disclosed by CASA pursuant to the FOI Act..

See - HERE - for CM's decision letter and for the released docs refer to this link: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...ents-1.pdf

This was CM's response to the CASA decision and released docs:

Re the decision not to include links to disclosed documents in the disclosure log: 

As usual, resources are the problem.   But I see a structural issue, too.  LIRA isn’t managing and running the process.   The process is being managed and run by the spin doctor, ‘Handy Andy’ Marcelja.  His team ‘dropped the ball’ – those are the words in the corro – on keeping the disclosure log up to date and he decided to go with option 3 – which is to provide the disclosed documents on request.  

C

CM also followed up with forwarding this information etc. to former Senator Rex Patrick...

I sent the below to (ex-Senator) Rex Patrick, who’s running an organisation called “Transparency Warrior”.  

Among the many FOI battles he’s won was getting access to the records of the so-called “National Cabinet”, which has no constitutional or other special legal status and is not the “Cabinet” whose documents are exempt from disclosure under FOI.  

He made an FOI application for National Cabinet records of its meeting on date X, was knocked back by the bureaucracy on the basis that National Cabinet was an extension of the Cabinet.   He applied to the AAT and the AAT said the National Cabinet is not an extension of the Cabinet and, therefore, the Cabinet exemption did not apply.  

Rex Patrick then made an FOI request for records of the National Cabinet meeting on day Y.   Oh no, said the bureaucracy:   AAT decisions have no general precedent application and so we’re going to knock you back on the basis of the Cabinet exemption!   The same dirty trick was played in RoboDebt when individuals won in the AAT because the AAT said the method of ‘raising debts’ was unlawful.   According to the bureaucracy, each application had to be considered on its facts and the basic legal principle at the heart of the AAT’s decision – the method of raising debts being unlawful – was, well, errrmmm ummmm not a precedent. 

CASA – usually Avmed – plays the same dirty trick.   No matter how many times the AAT has said that the Avmed doctor who made the decision under review is not qualified to express an expert opinion on the substance of their own decision, CASA keeps trotting the decision-maker out as a qualified expert in AAT reviews of that person’s own decision!  And – surprise surprise – their expert view is that their opinion on the medical issues is correct!     

This falls within my definition of “corruption”.   My definition extends way beyond mere exchanges of bags of cash for favours. 

Anyway, the FOI decision letter sent to me by CASA (which I’ve forwarded to Rex Patrick) cites a 2002 AAT decision as having general precedent application, supporting the redaction of the names of bureaucrats involved in the subject matter of an FOI request!   Have to admire the chutzpah, though. 

C

Much MTF...P2