A scathing audit report has found that nearly 80% of freedom of information (FoI) requests to Anthony Albanese's department, along with the Treasury and infrastructure department, were rejected, fostering a culture of "resistance and delay" within the Australian parliament. The review of FoI administration uncovered a lack of consistent, transparent, or accountable decision-making regarding requests, with the pro-disclosure objectives of the law being systematically undermined.
Key Findings of the Audit
The auditor general examined a sample of over 43,000 applications received by the Albanese government in 2024-25 and concluded that the departments lacked appropriate policies and procedures to meet transparency obligations. Furthermore, they failed to maintain adequate FoI records. In the last financial year, 79% of applications were refused in full or in part, and 57% resulted in no documents being released at all.
Response Times and Disclosure Logs
Departmental disclosure logs for FoI applications were found to be incomplete and not in compliance with legal requirements. Alarmingly, 63% of requests experienced response times exceeding the mandated 30-day deadline. Among application decisions referred to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) for review, 62% were either changed or overturned, indicating that bureaucrats were not fully adhering to their obligation to disclose official information.
Systemic Failures
The report stated, "The three audited entities are unable to demonstrate that they have met the obligation to take all reasonable steps to find requested documents. Entities are not maintaining adequate records of the searches they undertake in response to FoI applications to assure completeness. Entity records also do not consistently support decisions to refuse access because records could not be located or do not exist." There was a 25% increase in the number of FoI applications across government last financial year.
Reactions and Calls for Reform
Gabrielle Appleby, head of research for the Centre for Public Integrity, remarked that the audit report was intended to provide parliament with assurances on the effective administration of FoI rules. "Unfortunately, its findings do anything but," she said. "The report confirms that Australia's FoI system is not operating as a mechanism of transparency and accountability, but within a government culture of poor record-keeping, resistance and delay. With findings of this nature, it is not enough to simply put the ball back in departments' court and trust assurances from government that things will improve." Appleby called for a comprehensive and independent review of the FoI system.
Background on FoI Laws
The 1982 Freedom of Information Act allows the public to request official documents from government ministers, departments, and agencies. Strict rules govern what information can be withheld, but the system is often slow and can result in heavily redacted releases. In March, Labor abandoned its controversial plans to overhaul FoI rules, which would have imposed new fees and further reduced transparency, acknowledging that the laws had no viable pathway through parliament. The government had argued that changes were necessary because public servants were spending too much time responding to requests for government information. Labor's proposal would have also introduced new charges for journalists, politicians, and other experts seeking access to government information, similar to state-level charges of around $50 each. An FoI inquiry in 2023 described the system as "dysfunctional and broken" due to years of funding cuts, an absence of consequences, and a lack of senior pro-disclosure leaders across the public service.
