right to information annual report 2014 - web viewright to information annual report 2014-15 ......

Communications and Executive SupportDepartment of Justice

Right to InformationAnnual ReportOn the Administration of the Right to Information Act 2009 for the period 1 July 2014 – 30 June 2015. Presented to both Houses of Parliament pursuant to Section 53 of the Right to Information Act 2009.

Department of JusticeOFFICE OF THE SECRETARYLevel 14, 110 Collins Street, HobartPO Box 825 HOBART TAS 7001

The Hon Dr Vanessa Goodwin MLCAttorney-GeneralMinister for Justice

Annual Report on the Administration of the Right to Information Act 2009 for the year ended 30 June 2015

In accordance with the requirements of section 53 of the Right to Information Act 2009, I have pleasure in presenting the Annual Report on the administration of the Right to Information Act 2009 for the year ending 30 June 2015.

This is the fourth annual report on the administration of the Right to Information Act.

All statistics and figures contained in this Report are taken directly from agencies, public authorites and councils’ reports of their own figures for the year. The Department of Justice has copied these figures and compiled them for the purpose of this Report.

Simon OverlandSecretaryDepartment of Justice

Table of Contents

Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

Chapter One: Operation of the Act 5Object of the Act 5Application of the RTI Act to Departments, Councils, Ministers, and Public Authorities 6Right to Information Act 2009 7Interaction with Personal Information Protection Act 2004 7Decision Makers 7Data Contained within this Annual Report 8

Chapter Two: Applications Received and Decided 9Key Statistics and Trends 9Government Departments 10Councils 11Public Authorities 12

Chapter Three: Outcomes of Applications 14Determinations made on applications for information 14Government Departments 15Councils 16Public Authorities 18

Chapter Four: Reasons for refusal 21Use of exceptions 21Exemptions 27

Chapter Five: Timeframes for decisions 32Government Departments 32Councils 33Public Authorities 35

Chapter Six: Review of decisions 37Internal Reviews 38External Reviews 40

Chapter Seven: Administration of Right to Information 44

Chapter Eight: Additional statistics 45


Tasracing Pty Ltd 45Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd 47Tasmanian Railway Pty Ltd 49TT-Line Company Pty Ltd 51

Chapter Nine: Applications received by Ministers 54Minister for Police and Emergency Management, Minister for Infrastructure 54Minister for Education 56Minister for Resources 58Minister for State Growth 60

Appendix 1: List of Government Departments, Councils and Public Authorities as at 30 June2015 63


Chapter One: Operation of the ActObject of the ActThe underlying purposes of the Right to Information Act 2009 (the RTI Act) are found in Section 3 of the Act. The section reads as follows:

3. Object of Act

1) The object of this Act is to improve democratic government in Tasmania:(a) by increasing the accountability of the executive to the people of Tasmania;

and(b) by increasing the ability of the people of Tasmania to participate in their

governance; and(c) by acknowledging that information collected by public authorities is collected

for and on behalf of the people of Tasmania and is the property of the State.2) This object is to be pursued by giving members of the public the right to obtain

information held by public authorities and Ministers.3) This object is also to be pursued by giving members of the public the right to

obtain information about the operations of Government.4) It is the intention of Parliament:

(a) that this Act be interpreted so as to further the object set out in subsection (1); and

(b) that discretions conferred by this Act be exercised so as to facilitate and promote, promptly and at the lowest reasonable cost, the provision of the maximum amount of official information.

The Act is intended to improve the operation of democracy in the State by increasing the accountability of government to the people, and by increasing the ability of the people to participate in government decision-making. The underlying principle is that the information held by Tasmanian public authorities of all kinds belongs to the people of the State, and has been collected for them and on their behalf.

As Section 3(4) states, the Act is to be interpreted so as to further its objectives. The subsection also states Parliament's intention that decisions under the Act should be made with a view to facilitating the provision to the public of the maximum amount of information, quickly and as cheaply as is reasonably possible.


In line with the title to the Act and Section 7 of the Act (a section which is central to the Act's operation) Section 3 speaks of "a right to obtain information about the operations of Government". This statutory right has been created to assist in the better working of democracy, and should be seen as integral to our democratic system of government. The administration of the Act, including the making of decisions under the Act as to whether information requested under it is or is not released, is to be approached in this spirit.

Application of the RTI Act to Departments, Councils, Ministers, and Public AuthoritiesSection 5 includes a definition of ‘public authority’, being the organisations to which the Act applies:

"public authority" means –

(a) an Agency, within the meaning of the State Service Act 2000; or(b) the Police Service; or(c) a council; or(d) a statutory authority; or(e) a body, whether corporate or unincorporate, that is established by or under an

Act for a public purpose; or(f) a body whose members, or a majority of whose members, are appointed by the

Governor or a Minister of the Crown; or(g) a Government Business Enterprise within the meaning of the Government

Business Enterprises Act 1995; or(h) a council-owned company; or(i) a State-owned company.

This definition is wider than was used in the Freedom of Information Act 1991 (the FOI Act), and specifically includes all government owned businesses.

Section 6 provides that the Act does not apply to certain bodies or organisations, but that the exemption is limited:

1) This Act does not apply to information in the possession of the following persons or public authorities, or in the possession of a person whose services are provided or procured for the purposes of assisting the person or public


authority, unless the information relates to the administration of the relevant public authority:(a) the Governor;(b) a court;(c) a tribunal;(d) the Integrity Commission;(e) a judge;(f) an associate judge;(g) a magistrate;(h) the Solicitor-General;(i) the Director of Public Prosecutions;(j) the Ombudsman;(k) the Auditor-General;(l) (ka) the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania;(m) the State Service Commissioner;(n) (la) the Parole Board;(o) the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner;(p) the Public Guardian;(q) the Health Complaints Commissioner;(r) Parliament;(s) a Member of Parliament.

An exemption also applies to the Law Society of Tasmania in relation to the performance and exercise of the Society's functions and powers relating to trust accounts and trust monies, and also disciplinary proceedings.

Right to Information Act 2009The RTI Act replaced the FOI Act. The RTI Act, the repeal of the FOI Act, and related amendments to the Personal Information Protection Act 2004 (the PIP Act) were passed by Parliament in November 2009, and came into effect on 1 July 2010.

Interaction with Personal Information Protection Act 2004One consequence of the 2009 amendments is that some requests relating to personal information will not be determined under the RTI Act but under the PIP Act.


Decision MakersDecisions in respect of requests under the RTI Act for the provision of information or for amendment of information are to be to be made by the responsible Minister, the principal officer of the public authority or a delegated officer.

Under Section 21 of the Act, the responsible Minister and the principal officer of each public authority are automatically designated as decision makers. Section 24 allows the Minister or principal officer of a public authority to delegate decision making powers.

Data Contained within this Annual ReportAll statistics and figures contained in this Report are taken directly from government departments, public authorities and councils’ reports of their own figures for the year 2014-15. The Department of Justice has taken these figures and compiled them for the purpose of this Report. The Department of Justice is unable to validate the statistics that are provided to it. Some Tables contain minor discrepancies within the data, which may be the result of inaccurate or incomplete reporting by government departments, public authorities or councils


Chapter Two: Applications Received and DecidedKey Statistics and TrendsThere has been an increase in applications received since 2013-14. This follows a steady decrease of applications received in previous years. It is unclear what the cause of the increase in applications for 2014-15 was. One possible reason is that the public is becoming more aware of the availability of information, in light of coverage of the right to information process in various forms of media. Another possible reason for this year’s increase is applicants lodging the same request across multiple public authorities.

In the 2014-15 financial year, 98% of the applications accepted were determined. Positively, of the 952 determinations, 72% were determined within 20 working days.

The Ombudsman determined 8 applications for review under RTI in the 2014-15 reporting period (see Tables 28-30). The 8 determined Ombudsman reviews represent less than 1% of the total applications accepted.

Table 1. Key Statistics

Total number of: 2012:-13 2013-14 2014-15

Applications received 949 812 1,091

Applications accepted 856 708 965

Applications determined 817 691 952Applications that took less than 20 working days 576 503 692

Applications that took more than 20 working days 130 80 241

Applications that included a negotiated extension 129 117 131

Applications that included an Ombudsman’s extension 1 1 1

Applications granted in full 303 261 356

Applications granted in part 362 335 440

Applications refused and exceptions used 107 143 113


Total number of: 2012:-13 2013-14 2014-15

Applications where exemptions were used 729 684 904Main sections under which applications was refused/exempted

^s.35 s.36

^s.36 s.30 s.36 s.30

Applications for internal review determined 35 37 33

Applications for external review determined 20 16 8*Please note that multiple exemptions can be used to exempt an application.^ s.30 RTI Act: ‘Information relating to enforcement of the law‘, 3.35 RTI Act: ‘Internal deliberative information’.s.36 RTI Act: ‘Personal information of a person’.

Table 2 below shows that by far, the majority of the 970 RTI applications accepted during 2014-15 were made to government departments. Departments accounted for 71%, councils for 13% and public authorities for 16% of accepted applications.

Table 2. Applications Received, Accepted and Determined – Summary

Agency ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted

Application Determined

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Government Departments 593 790 509 696 488 689

Councils 91 137 87 128 87 123

Public Authorities 128 164 112 146 116 140

TOTAL 812 1 091 708 970 691 952

Government DepartmentsOf the 696 requests accepted by departments in 2014-2015, 38% were accepted by one department (see Table 3). The Department of Police and Emergency Management accepted 265 requests, comparable to the previous year’s figure of 288. The next highest total was 84 accepted by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Table 3. Applications Received, Accepted and Determined - Government Departments


Government Departments ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted


2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Education 27 37 20 34 20 32Health & Human Services^ 47 87 46 84 46 75

Justice^ 53 85 51 79 42 76Police & Emergency Management 339 323 288 265 284 314

Premier & Cabinet^ 28 73 25 70 24 73Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment^ 40 78 36 77 31 53

State Growth - 79 - 60 - 43

Treasury & Finance^ 17 28 15 27 13 23

TOTAL 593 790 509 696 488 689

^ Includes applications made to that Department’s Minister.

CouncilsApplications accepted by Hobart City Council represented 37% of all requests accepted by councils in 2014-2015.

Generally, the number of requests accepted by individual councils remains low, with only five other councils accepting 6 or more requests. There were a number of councils who received no applications.

Overall, the applications made to councils increased by nearly 50% in 2014-2015.

Table 4. Applications Received, Accepted and Determined – Councils

Council ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted


2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Break O'Day Council 1 5 1 5 1 5

Brighton Council 2 Nil 2 Nil 2 Nil


Council ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted


2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Burnie City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Central Coast Council Nil 2 Nil 2 Nil 2

Central Highlands Council Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil 1

Circular Head Council 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil

Clarence City Council 3 14 3 11 3 11

Derwent Valley Council 2 4 2 4 2 4

Devonport City Council 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dorset Council 4 1 3 1 4 1

George Town Council 5 4 5 4 5 4Glamorgan/Spring Bay Council 1 4 1 4 1 4

Glenorchy City Council 6 11 6 11 7 10

Hobart City Council 39 48 39 48 38 46

Huon Valley Council 3 5 1 4 1 3

Kingborough Council Nil 7 Nil 4 Nil 4

Launceston City Council 7 15 6 14 5 14

Sorell Council 4 7 4 7 4 6Southern Midlands Council 5 5 5 5 5 5

Waratah-Wynyard Council 6 1 6 1 6 1

West Tamar Council 1 1 1 1 1 1

TOTAL 91 137 87 128 87 123


*Only those councils with applicable data are included in this Table.

Public AuthoritiesAs Table 5 shows, most public authorities receive few requests, if any. The Motor Accidents Insurance Board, Forestry Tasmania and TasWater are the only Authorities reaching double figures (78, 20 and 20 respectively) in respect of applications during 2014-15. These three Authorities account for over two-thirds of the total number of accepted applications for the 2014-2015 period.

Table 5. Applications Received, Accepted and Determined – Public Authorities

Public Authority ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted


2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd - 4 - 4 - 4

Copping Refuse Disposal Site Joint Authority Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forest Practices Authority Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil 3

Forestry Tasmania 5 20 5 12 5 12Hydro Electric Corporation Tasmania 6 4 6 4 6 4

Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania 2 1 1 1 1 1

Legal Profession Board Tasmania^ 2 Nil 2 Nil 2 Nil

Marine & Safety Tasmania 5 6 5 5 5 5

Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd 5 3 1 3 4 3Motor Accidents Insurance Board 55 78 54 76 55 76

Office of the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner

2 Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil

Office of the Tasmanian Economic Regulator Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Property Agents Board 1 1 1 1 1 1Retirement Benefits Fund Board 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil


Public Authority ApplicationReceived

ApplicationAccepted


2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Tasmanian Building and Construction Industry Training Board

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Tasmania Fire Service 13 7 8 4 8 4

TasPorts 2 3 2 3 2 2

TasWater 19 20 15 18 14 15Teachers Registration Board 1 1 1 1 1 1

The Public Trustee Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

University of Tasmania 4 9 4 7 4 6

TOTAL 128 164 112 146 116 140

*Only public authorities with applicable data are included in this Table.


Chapter Three: Outcomes of ApplicationsDeterminations made on applications for informationApplications for information may result in access to the information requested being provided in full, provided in part, or refused. In addition, applications may be withdrawn, or where the requested agency does not hold the information requested it may transfer the request to another agency.

In the 2014-15 financial year, 356 applications were granted access to the whole of the information they sought, 436 applications resulted in the applicant obtaining part access, and 113 were denied access.

Determinations in which information may have had to be redacted (because it was not relevant to the request or because it may have breached another person’s privacy) are usually categorised as providing “part access”. As such, the number of applicants who received all of the information they were actually seeking may be higher than stated.

The limited number of reviews sought may be an indication that the applicants were generally content with the amount or range of information that they were provided.

Tables 6 to 9 detail the outcome of requests formally determined under the RTI Act compared with the previous reporting period, but do not include those requests which departments, authorities or councils determined under other procedures and policies.

Table 6. Outcome of Applications – Summary

Agency Full Access Part Access Refused Transferred Withdrawn2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Government Departments

134 219 271 334 70 96 25 38 20 22

Councils 68 93 12 20 6 6 1 1 2 2Public Authorities 59 44 52 82 5 11 4 2 2 9

TOTAL 261 356 335 436 81 113 30 41 24 33


*An application may be for more than one item of information and an application may be refused wholly or partly on several different bases. This may lead to the totals of the outcomes failing to match the number of applications determined under the Act.


Government DepartmentsAs Table 7 shows, during the 2014-15 financial year, government departments supplied the following information:

219 applications were granted full access 334 were granted partial access 96 were refused, and 60 of applications were transferred to another public authority, or withdrawn by the applicant.

Table 7. Outcome of Applications - Government Departments

Government Department

Full Access Part Access Refused Transferred Withdrawn

2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Education 4 15 6 9 9 4 Nil 2 10 1Health & Human Services 20 37 22 30 3 7 3 4 Nil Nil

Justice 16 20 16 32 8 23 5 8 Nil 3Police & Emergency Management 54 66 202 202 25 41 4 11 4 2

Premier & Cabinet 13 34 5 21 4 4 3 2 Nil 1Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

15 19 11 19 4 11 3 2 2 4

State Growth - 22 - 9 - 4 - 8 - 11



Full Access Part Access Refused Transferred Withdrawn

2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Treasury & Finance 6 6 2 12 5 2 3 1 1 Nil

TOTAL 134 219 271 436 70 113 25 41 20 33

*An application may be for more than one item of information and an application may be refused wholly or partly on several different bases. In addition, some parts of applications may be transferred to another department. This may lead to the totals of the outcomes failing to match the number of applications determined under the Act.

CouncilsFor councils, Table 8 shows that:

93 applicants were given full access 20 were given partial access 6 were refused, and 3 were transferred or withdrawn by the applicant.

Table 8. Outcome of Applications – Councils

Council Full Access Part Access Refused Transferred Withdrawn

2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Break O'Day Council 1 4 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Brighton Council 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil



2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Burnie City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Central Coast Council Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilCentral Highlands Council Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Circular Head Council 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Clarence City Council 3 8 Nil 2 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil NilDerwent Valley Council Nil 3 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Devonport City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Dorset Council 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

George Town Council 4 4 Nil Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil Nil NilGlamorgan/Spring Bay Council 1 4 Nil 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Glenorchy City Council 3 8 4 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Hobart City Council 34 39 3 2 Nil 3 Nil Nil 1 2

Huon Valley Council Nil 2 1 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Kingborough Council Nil 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil



2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Latrobe Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilLaunceston City Council 2 5 1 9 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Northern Midlands Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Sorell Council 4 6 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil NilSouthern Midlands Council 4 2 1 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Waratah/Wynyard Council 4 Nil Nil Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

West Tamar Council 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 68 93 12 20 6 6 1 1 1 2

*Only those councils with applicable data are included in this Table.** An application may be for more than one item of information and an application may be refused wholly or partly on several different bases. In addition, some parts of applications may be transferred to another department. This may lead to the totals of the outcomes failing to match the number of applications determined under the Act.

Public AuthoritiesFor public authorities, Table 9 shows that:

44 applicants were given full access 82 applicants were given partial access


11 were refused, and 11 applications were transferred, withdrawn by the applicant.


Table 9. Outcome of Applications – Public Authorities

Public Authority Full Access Part Access Refused Transferred Withdrawn

2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd - 2 - 2 - Nil - Nil - Nil

Copping Refuse Disposal Site Joint Authority

Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forest Practices Authority Nil 1 Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forestry Tasmania 3 3 1 4 1 4 Nil Nil Nil 8Hydro Electric Corporation Tasmania

3 4 2 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Aid Commission 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Profession Board Tasmania 2 - Nil - Nil - Nil - Nil -

Marine & Safety Tasmania 5 2 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd 1 2 3 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Motor Accidents Insurance Board 21 9 33 63 Nil 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Office of the Anti- 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77


2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Discrimination CommissionerPort Arthur Historic Site Management Authority

Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Property Agents Board Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Retirement Benefits Fund Board Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Tasmanian Building and Construction Industry Training Board

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Tasmania Fire Service 6 4 2 Nil Nil Nil 3 2 2 1

Tasmanian Pharmacy Authority Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TasPorts 1 Nil 1 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TasWater 14 11 Nil 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilTeachers Registration Board Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

The Public Trustee Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilUniversity of Tasmania Nil 3 3 3 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil



2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Wellington Park Management Trust Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 59 44 52 82 5 11 4 2 2 9

*Only authorities that finalised requests in either of the previous financial years are included in this Table.**An application may be for more than one item of information and an application may be refused wholly or partly on several different bases. In addition, some parts of applications may be transferred to another department. This may lead to the totals of the outcomes failing to match the number of applications determined under the Act.


Chapter Four: Reasons for refusalThe provision of information can be refused under the RTI Act if the information is exempt, excepted from the operation of the Act (for example, section 6(1)(a) ‘information in the possession of the Governor’), or falls into a number of other categories. This does not necessarily mean that the person will not be able to access the information, as access may be provided by other means such as referral to websites or to publications already available such as Annual Reports.

Use of exceptionsThe “exceptions” and grounds for refusal set out in Part 2 of the Act are:

Sections 5, 11 and 17Refusal where information requested was not within the scope of the Act (s.5 – Not official business; s.11 – available at Archives Office and s.17 – Deferred)

Sections 9 and12Refusal where information is otherwise available or will become otherwise available in the next 12 months

Sections 10 and 19Refusal where resources of the public authority would be unreasonably diverted in determining the application

Section 20Refusal where the application is repeated or vexatious or lacking in definition after negotiation.

While it is neither an exception nor a refusal in the real sense, this Chapter also includes applications which are unable to be fulfilled because the information sought is not in the possession of the agency. Where it can be identified that the information may be held by another agency the application must be transferred to the other relevant body.


Table 10. Exceptions and Other Refusals

Agencies Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)

Information already available(ss.9, 12)

Unreasonable diversion of resources(s.10, 19)

Repeat (s.20) Information not in the possession of the agency

2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Government Department 11 24 14 36 5 9 2 21 13 44

Councils Nil Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 7

Public Authorities 2 1 3 29 5 6 Nil Nil 4 5

TOTAL 13 25 18 65 11 15 3 21 17 56

*Waratah-Wynyard Council reported one refusal under s 18(4).

Tables 10-13 (Exceptions & Other Refusals) and 14-17 (Exemptions) indicate that the two most commonly used reasons for not providing requested information were Sections 9, 12 (information already otherwise available) or the information was not in the possession of the agency.

As noted above, while included in this Chapter as ‘refusals’, the use of Sections 9 and 12 does not necessarily mean that the applicant did not get the information requested, but merely that it was unnecessary or inappropriate to use the Right to Information process to seek the information.

The inability to provide the applicant with the requested information because it is not in the possession of the agency, while neither an exemption nor exception, has been included in Tables 11-13 to indicate the disposition of the application. This may occur because the applicant is mistaken as to the nature of information that is held by the agency, or because the agency does not Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

hold or no longer holds the requested information. Reviews of decisions are able to be requested where the applicant is not satisfied that an adequate search for the information has been undertaken.


Table 11. Exceptions - Government Departments


Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)




2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Education Nil 1 Nil 4 Nil 4 Nil 1 1 4Health & Human Services Nil 2 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 5

Justice 1 12 3 7 2 1 Nil Nil 2 1Police & Emergency Management 8 6 2 16 1 Nil 1 19 3 5

Premier & Cabinet Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil 2 14Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

Nil Nil 1 2 Nil 3 Nil Nil 1 4

State Growth - 2 - 7 - Nil - 1 - 8

Treasury & Finance 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 3

TOTAL 11 24 18 36 5 9 2 21 13 44


Table 12. Exceptions – Councils

Council Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)




2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

Break O Day Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilDerwent Valley Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

Dorset Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

George Town Council Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil NilGlenorchy City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

Hobart City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 2

Huon Valley Council Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Kingborough Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilLaunceston City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

Sorell Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilWaratah-Wynyard Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

West Coast Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1


Council Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)




2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15

TOTAL Nil Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil 1 7



Table 13. Exceptions - Public Authorities

Public Authority Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)




2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd - Nil - Nil - Nil - Nil - Nil

Forest Practices Authority Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forestry Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil 1Hydro Electric Corporation Tasmania

1 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Aid Commission Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Profession Board Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Macquarie Point Development Commission

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Marine and Safety Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 2

Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd Nil Nil Nil Nil 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Motor Accidents Nil Nil Nil 28 Nil 3 Nil Nil 1 NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

Public Authority Not within scope of Act(ss.5, 11, 17)




2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 2014-15Insurance BoardOffice of the Anti-Discrimination Commission

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

Property Agents Board Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Retirement Benefits Fund Board Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Tasmania Fire Service Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 2

TasWater Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil NilUniversity of Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 2 1 3 29 5 6 Nil Nil 4 5



ExemptionsThe RTI Act has a number of provisions which exempt certain types of information from release under the Act. As noted previously, the application of exemptions may not necessarily result in denial of access and in some cases the RTI Officer’s determination may exclude from release parts of documents that are not relevant to or necessarily part of the request.

When information is deleted from or obscured in the material released, it tends to be recorded as an exemption, even though in some cases the information which is not being released falls outside of the scope of the request.

The way in which the data for this Annual Report is collected does not explain the reasons exemptions are applied to the redacted documents. For example, a document may be exempt under Section 35 (internal deliberative information) but this report will not explain how or why that document was considered to be exempt. Details about how and why documents are exempt are normally explained in written decisions by the relevant public authority or Minister.

The following is a list of the exemption provisions in Part 3 of the Act:

Section 25 - Executive Council information Section 26 - Cabinet information Section 27 - Internal briefing information of a Minister Section 28 - Information not relating to official business Section 29 - Information affecting national or state security, defence or

international relations Section 30 - Information relating to enforcement of the law Section 31 - Legal professional privilege Section 32 - Information related to closed meetings of council Section 34 - Information communicated by other jurisdictions Section 35 - Internal deliberative information Section 36 - Personal information of person Section 37 - Information relating to business affairs of third party Section 38 - Information relating to business affairs of public authority Section 39 - Information obtained in confidence Section 40 - Information on procedures and criteria used in certain negotiations

of public authorityRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

Section 41 - Information likely to affect State economy Section 42 - Information likely to affect cultural, heritage and natural resources

of the State.

Of the 904 exemptions claimed in 2014-15, Section 36 (Personal information of a person) was the most frequently applied exemption with 273 uses. This is commonly used to protect the privacy of third parties. Because documents containing information requested by the applicant can often include information that relates to a third party, the names and other identifying or personal information of the third party may be masked on the released documents. This will generally be recorded as an exemption under Section 36 having been applied to the document.

Where an application for assessed disclosure is received and the information requested contains third party content, Sections 36 or 37 require the decision maker to consult with that third party. In the case of ‘personal information of a person’, the disclosure must only cause a ‘concern’ to the third party. In the case of ‘information relating to the business affairs of a third party’, the disclosure must be expected to cause a ‘substantial concern’.

In addition, the decision maker need only consult under Section 36 ‘if practicable’ to do so, but this discretion does not apply to business affairs of the third party in Section 37.


Table 14. Exemptions claimed – Summary

Agency s.25

s.26

s.27

s.28

s.29

s.30

s.31

s.32

s.34

s.35

s.36

s.37

s.38

s.39

s.40

s.41

s.42 TOTAL

Government Departments 1 23 44 4 1 18

1 74 Nil 12 132

210 21 4 48 2 Nil Nil 757

Councils Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 3 3 1 Nil 5 8 12 2 2 Nil 1 Nil 37

Public Authorities Nil Nil 4 Nil Nil 3 19 1 Nil 3 55 6 11 5 2 Nil 1 110

TOTAL 1 23 48 4 1 187 96 2 12 14

0273 39 17 55 4 1 1 904

Table 15. Exemptions claimed - Government Departments

Government Department s.25

s.26

s.27

s.28

s.29

s.30

s.31

s.32

s.34

s.35

s.36

s.37

s.38

s.39

s.40

s.41

s.42

Education Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil 1 1 Nil 1 1 2 1 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

Health & Human Services Nil 6 20 Nil Nil 1 7 Nil 3 22 16 6 1 11 1 Nil Nil

Justice 1 6 5 Nil Nil 7 17 Nil Nil 12 18 Nil Nil 4 Nil Nil NilPolice & Emergency Management Nil 1 3 3 1 17

1 41 Nil 7 58 157 Nil Nil 16 Nil Nil Nil

Premier & Cabinet Nil 4 4 1 Nil Nil 3 Nil Nil 12 8 3 Nil 4 1 Nil NilPrimary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment Nil 1 2 Nil Nil 1 5 Nil Nil 13 2 9 1 8 Nil Nil Nil

State Growth Nil 3 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 5 5 1 1 2 Nil Nil Nil


Government Department s.25

s.26

s.27

s.28

s.29

s.30

s.31

s.32

s.34

s.35

s.36

s.37

s.38

s.39

s.40

s.41

s.42

Treasury & Finance Nil 2 6 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 9 2 1 1 2 Nil Nil Nil


Table 16. Exemptions claimed - Councils

Council s.30 s.31 s.32 s.35 s.36 s.37 s.38 s.39 s.41

Break O’Day Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

Clarence City Council 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Derwent Valley Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Devonport City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

Glenorchy City Council 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Hobart City Council 1 Nil Nil 2 3 Nil 1 1 1

Huon Valley Council Nil Nil Nil Nil 2 2 1 Nil Nil

Launceston City Council Nil 2 Nil 3 2 6 Nil Nil Nil

Sorell Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil*Only those councils with applicable data are included in this Table.

Table 17. Exemptions claimed - Public Authorities

Public Authority S.27 S.29 S.30 S.31 S.35 S.36 S.37 S.38 S.39 S.40 S.41 S.42

Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 1 1 Nil Nil Nil NilCopping Refuse Disposal Site Joint Authority Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forest Practices Authority Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


Public Authority S.27 S.29 S.30 S.31 S.35 S.36 S.37 S.38 S.39 S.40 S.41 S.42

Forestry Tasmania 3 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil 2 6 Nil Nil Nil 1Hydro Electric Corporation Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Marine and Safety Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Metro Tasmania Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil Nil 1 1 Nil NilMotor Accidents Insurance Board Nil Nil 1 18 Nil 47 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Property Agents Board Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil NilRetirement Benefits Fund Board Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TasPorts Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil 1 1 1 1 Nil Nil

Teachers Registration Board Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

University of Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 3 Nil 3 1 Nil Nil Nil*Only public authorities with applicable data are included in this Table.


Chapter Five: Timeframes for decisionsSection 15 of the RTI Act requires an agency to notify an applicant of its decision in respect of an application for information, within 20 working days of the application being accepted.

An application is considered to be accepted when the application is received with an application fee (if any), or a decision is made to waive the fee and the negotiation period, if any, is completed. The negotiation period is a maximum of 10 working days after the application is received.

The 20 working day processing period may be extended by a further period of 20 working days if there is a need to consult a third party in accordance with Section 36 or 37.

The period for consultation may also be extended by agreement with the applicant or by the Ombudsman based on an application from the public authority (see Sub-Section 15 (4)(b)). An application to the Ombudsman to extend time should be in writing and must detail the reasons the public authority is seeking the extension and why that meets the criteria in the Act.

During the 2014-15 financial year, 692 of the 952 determined applications (72%) were completed within the initial 20 day period.

Table 18. Time Taken to Complete Requests – Summary

Agency 20 working days or less

Extension Negotiated Applicant

Extension Negotiated Ombudsman

Third Party Consultation

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Government Department 327 477 36 44 Nil 1 64 50

Councils 74 95 2 5 Nil Nil 6 12

Public Authorities 102 120 2 8 1 Nil 7 12

TOTAL 503 692 40 57 1 1 77 74


Government DepartmentsOf the 689 applications determined by government departments (Table 3), 69% of decisions were determined within the 20-day deadline.

Of note is the effort by the Department of Police and Emergency Management, which processed 90% of its RTI applications within the 20 working day period, despite that department having by far the highest number of applications.

Table 19. Time Taken to Complete Requests - Government Departments


20 working days or less




2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Education 13 18 Nil 5 Nil Nil 1 NilHealth & Human Services 7 23 10 9 Nil 1 Nil Nil

Justice 30 60 5 4 Nil Nil 1 NilPolice & Emergency Management 225 284 10 2 Nil Nil 49 28

Premier & Cabinet 15 43 4 3 Nil Nil 1 3Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment

10 17 6 18 Nil Nil 6 4

State Growth - 16 - Nil - Nil - 27

Treasury & Finance 11 16 1 3 Nil Nil 1 2

TOTAL 327 477 36 44 Nil 1 64 50

CouncilsTable 20. Time Taken to Complete Requests – Councils

Council 20 working days or less




2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Break O'Day Council 1 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 3






2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Brighton Council 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Burnie City Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilCentral Coast Council Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Central Highlands Council Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Circular Head Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

Clarence City Council 3 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Derwent Valley Council Nil 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil 2 1

Devonport City Council 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Dorset Council 3 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 NilGeorge Town Council 2 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Glamorgan Spring Bay Nil 4 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Glenorchy City Council 7 9 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

Hobart City Council 37 45 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Huon Valley Council Nil 2 Nil 2 Nil Nil 1 Nil

Kingborough Council Nil 1 Nil 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Latrobe Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilLaunceston City Council 5 7 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 7

Northern Midlands Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Sorell Council 4 7 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilSouthern Midlands Council 5 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Waratah-Wynyard Council 3 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil






2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

West Tamar Council 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 74 95 2 5 Nil Nil 6 12


77% of decisions by councils were finalised within 20 working days.


Public AuthoritiesTable 21. Time Taken to Complete Requests - Public Authorities

Public Authority 20 working days or less




2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd - 1 - 1 - Nil - 1

Copping Refuse Disposal Site Joint Authority

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

Forest Practices Authority Nil 1 Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forestry Tasmania 2 8 1 Nil Nil Nil 2 4

Hydro Tasmania 5 3 Nil 1 1 Nil Nil NilLegal Aid Commission Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Profession Board Tasmania* 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Marine and Safety Tasmania 4 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil 1 2

Macquarie Point Development Commission

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd 4 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Motor Accidents Insurance Board 55 76 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Office of the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner

1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Office of the Tasmanian Economic Regulator

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority

Nil 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Property Agents Board 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Retirement Benefits 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

Public Authority 20 working days or less




2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

2013-14

2014-15

Fund BoardTasmania Fire Service 6 3 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TasPorts 1 2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

TasWater 14 14 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil 1Teachers Registration Board 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

The Public Trustee Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilUniversity of Tasmania Nil 2 1 3 Nil Nil 3 2

Wellington Park Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 102 120 2 8 1 Nil 7 12

*Only those public authorities with applicable data are included in this Table.

85% of applications determined by public authorities were determined within 20 days.


Chapter Six: Review of decisionsThe RTI Act provides a number of avenues for review to an applicant who is not satisfied that the agency has made a proper search or released all the information which the applicant has sought, or to which the applicant claims to be entitled. The applicant can also challenge exemptions or exceptions used by the agency. Reviews may be sought within the agency or by the Ombudsman.

A review of a decision can be made to the principal officer by an original applicant, or by an external party in relation to a decision to release information concerning personal information of a person, or by an external party in relation to a decision to release information concerning the business affairs of that third party. In these instances, the principal officer must as soon as practicable review the decision and make a fresh decision, or arrange for a delegated officer (other than the delegated officer who made the decision) to review the decision and make a fresh decision.

The following decisions under the Act are, at the request of the applicant, subject to review by the agency which made the initial decision in relation to the RTI request:

that the applicant is not entitled to the information requested; that the information requested is exempt information; that provision of the information should be deferred pending publication or

presentation to Parliament; the refusal of a request on the grounds that a request is deemed to be

voluminous; to provide to a third party, without the consent of the person, information

relating to the personal affairs of a person; to provide to a third party, without the consent of the business or undertaking,

information which is likely to expose the commercial affairs of a business or undertaking to competitive disadvantage;

the deemed refusal of a request due to delay beyond the date a response is due.

If the Minister or the principal officer of the agency made the original decision, then a request for a review may be made directly to the Ombudsman. In most cases an authorised officer rather than the principal officer makes the initial decision so direct recourse to the Ombudsman is not available. Ministers make very few, if any, Right to


Information decisions, as most have chosen to delegate this power to an agency officer or officers.

Where the decision maker has not provided a decision within the time limit set by the Act, an application for review may be made directly to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman generally prefers to expedite the determination of the request by the original agency rather than using the Ombudsman’s power to determine a request without an initial decision having been made by the Agency.


Internal ReviewsAll agencies reported 39 requests for internal review in 2014-15, and made some 33 internal review determinations in the reporting period. This was a decrease on the previous year.

Table 22. Internal Reviews – Government Departments

Government Department 2013-14 2014-15

Internal Reviews Requested

Internal Reviews Determined



Education 1 1 1 1

Health & Human Services 2 4 2 2

Justice 3 8 6 4

Police and Emergency Management 2 10 7 7

Premier and Cabinet Nil 3 4 4Primary Industries Parks, Water and Environment 1 2 6 6

State Growth - - 2 1

Treasury and Finance Nil 1 3 2

SUBTOTAL 34 30 31 27

Table 23. Internal Reviews – Councils

Council 2013-14 2014-15





Break O’Day Council Nil Nil 1 1

Derwent Valley Council 1 1 Nil Nil

Dorset Council Nil Nil 1 1

George Town Council 1 1 Nil Nil


Council 2013-14 2014-15





Waratah-Wynyard Council 2 2 Nil Nil

SUBTOTAL 4 4 2 2

*Only councils with applicable data are included in this Table.


Table 24. Internal Reviews – Public Authorities

Public Authority 2013-14 2014-15





Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd - - Nil Nil

Forestry Tasmania 2 2 2 2

Hydro Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil

Motor Accident Insurance Board Nil Nil 2 2

Retirement Benefits Fund Board Nil Nil Nil Nil

Transend Nil Nil Nil Nil

TasWater - - 2 Nil

The Public Trustee Nil Nil Nil Nil

University of Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil

SUBTOTAL 3 3 6 4



External ReviewsExternal review rights arise when internal review possibilities are exhausted. That is, where an internal review has been applied for and either that decision has been made and communicated to the applicant, or has failed to be made and the time to make that decision has expired.

Additionally, a series of other decisions made under this Act are reviewable by the Ombudsman if an application to review has been made within 20 days of the applicant or third party being notified of the decision. These include:

Where a decision has been made in the first instance by a principal officer of a public authority and as a consequence the applicant cannot make an application for internal review.

Where a public authority has made a decision that the information requested was not in existence on the day the application was made.

Where a public authority has made a decision to give access other than in the form requested by the applicant, except where to do so would breach copyright.

Where a public authority has decided that the information requested is not in the possession of the Minister or public authority.

Following a decision being made by a public authority, the applicant believes, on reasonable grounds, that there has been an inadequate search for the information by the Minister or public authority.

Where notice of a decision on an original application has not been received by the applicant within the timelines provided for in this Act

If a person has applied for information in accordance with section 13, another person may apply to the Ombudsman for review if:

o a public authority has decided not to consult the person as a third party under section 36(2) or section 37(2) and the person believes that he or she is a person who was required to be consulted; or

o a decision has been made on an internal review and a person, other than the person who applied for the review, is adversely affected by the decision.

There are no time limits applicable to the Ombudsman’s decisions.


Table 25. Ombudsman Reviews - Summary of Decisions on Formal Reviews

Decision 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Agency Decisions affirmed in full 10 11 8

Agency Decision Varied 6 2 5

Agency Decision Set Aside 4 2 3

TOTAL 20 15 16

Table 26. Ombudsman Reviews – Government Departments

Government Departments 2013-14 2014-15

Applications Received

Formal Reviews Undertaken

Decision Varied

Formal Reviews Requested

Formal Reviews Determined

Decision Varied in part or in full

Education 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Health & Human Services 2 2 1 1 1 1

Justice 3 3 1 3 Nil Nil

Police and Emergency Management 2 1 Nil 5 2 Nil

Premier and Cabinet Nil 1 Nil 1 Nil NilPrimary Industries Parks, Water and Environment 1 1 Nil 4 Nil Nil

State Growth - - - 1 1 Nil


Government Departments 2013-14 2014-15



Decision Varied




Treasury and Finance Nil Nil Nil 2 1 Nil

TOTAL 10 10 3 17 5 1

Table 27. Ombudsman Reviews – Councils

Council 2013-14 2014-15



Decision Varied




Devonport Council 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Dorset Council Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

George Town Council 1 1 1 Nil Nil Nil

Hobart City Council Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil

Launceston City Council 1 1 Nil 4 2 2

Southern Midlands Council Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil

Waratah-Wynyard Council 1 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

TOTAL 4 3 1 6 3 2



Table 28. Ombudsman Reviews - Public Authorities

Public Authorities 2013-14 2014-15



Decision Varied




Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilCopping Refuse Disposal Site Joint Authority 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Forestry Tasmania 1 1 Nil 1 Nil Nil

Hydro Tasmania 1 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Marine and Safety Tasmania Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilMacquarie Point Development Commission Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

TOTAL 4 3 Nil 1 Nil Nil*Only public authorities with applicable data are included in this Table.


Chapter Seven: Administration of Right to InformationThe RTI Act provides that the Ombudsman will continue to be the reviewing entity, as was the case under the FOI Act, but with some enhanced powers. It also provides for the Ombudsman to publish decisions of note as a guide to interpretation of the Act; to prepare and maintain practice guidelines on the application of the legislation; and to conciliate applications for review with agreed outcomes having the force of a decision of the Ombudsman. As a consequence, the Office of the Ombudsman has taken on a more significant role in the raising of awareness, public information and training.


Chapter Eight: Additional statisticsIn the course of compiling this year’s report, the Department of Justice became aware that four public authorities’ statistics had not been collected for the purpose of the Annual Report in previous years (from 2010-11 to 2013-14).

Those four public authorities are:

Tasracing Pty Ltd Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd Tasmanian Railway Pty Ltd TT-Line Company Pty Ltd.

It is emphasised that these public authorities still assessed RTI applications in all of these years.

Statistics for these four public authorities during the four years they have not been reported are provided in the below tables. For ease of comparison with previous years, the 2014-15 statistics are listed in these tables, rather than the previous chapters. The percentages from previous chapters exclude the figures provided below.

Tasracing Pty Ltd

Number of Applications 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014 -15

Applications received 5 1 1 Nil Nil

Applications accepted 5 1 1 Nil NilApplications transferred or part transferred Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications withdrawn Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications determined 5 1 1 Nil Nil

Outcome of Applications 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014 -15

Determinations provided in full 1 Nil 1 Nil Nil

Determinations provided in part 4 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Determinations refused Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil

Applications not in the possession of Nil Nil Nil Nil NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

the public authority or MinisterApplications subject to an external party review under s 44 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Reasons for Refusal 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

s.5, s.11, s.17 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

s.9, s.12 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

s.10, s.19 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

s.20 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Exemptions 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15



s.27 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil









s.36 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil








Time to make decisions 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

1-20 working days 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

More than 20 working days 4 1 1 Nil NilMore than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(b) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Internal reviews 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Internal Reviews Requested Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Internal Reviews Determined Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Internal reviews upheld in part Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Internal reviews upheld in full Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Internal reviews reversed in full Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

External review 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

External Reviews Requested Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

External Reviews Determined Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

External Reviews upheld in full Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

External Reviews upheld in part Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

External Reviews reversed in full Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Applications received Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications accepted Nil Nil Nil Nil NilApplications transferred or part transferred Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil



Applications determined Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Determinations provided in full Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Determinations provided in part Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Determinations refused Nil Nil Nil Nil NilApplications not in the possession of the public authority or Minister Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications subject to an external party review under s 44 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15





Exemptions 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15





















2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

1-20 working days Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

More than 20 working days Nil Nil Nil Nil NilMore than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15







2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15







Tasmanian Railway Pty Ltd


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Applications received 3 Nil 1 1 5

Applications accepted 3 Nil 1 Nil 5Applications transferred or part transferred Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


Applications determined 3 Nil 1 Nil 5


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Determinations provided in full 2 Nil Nil Nil 3

Determinations provided in part Nil Nil 1 Nil 2

Determinations refused Nil Nil Nil 1 NilApplications not in the possession of the public authority or Minister 1 Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications subject to an external party review under s 44 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15





Exemptions 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15












s.35 Nil Nil 1 1 Nil

s.36 Nil Nil Nil Nil 2

s.37 Nil Nil 1 Nil 2

s.38 Nil Nil 1 1 2


s.40 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil

s.41 Nil Nil 1 Nil Nil



2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

1-20 working days 2 Nil Nil Nil 3

More than 20 working days 1 Nil 1 Nil 2More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) Nil Nil 1 Nil 2


More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) Nil Nil 1 Nil 1


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15






External review 2010- 2011- 2012- 2013- 2014-Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

11 12 13 14 15






TT-Line Company Pty Ltd


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014 15

Applications received 4 4 3 4 3

Applications accepted 3 3 2 3 3Applications transferred or part transferred Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications withdrawn 1 1 1 1 Nil

Applications determined 3 3 2 3 3


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

Determinations provided in full 1 1 Nil Nil 1

Determinations provided in part 1 1 Nil 1 Nil

Determinations refused 1 1 2 2 2Applications not in the possession of the public authority or Minister Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

Applications subject to an external party review under s 44 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil


2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15



s.10, s.19 1 1 1 Nil Nil



Exemptions 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15






s.30 Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil





s.35 Nil Nil 1 1 1



s.38 1 1 Nil 1 1

s.39 1 1 1 2 1

s.40 Nil Nil Nil 1 1

s.41 Nil Nil Nil 2 Nil



2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

1-20 working days 2 2 2 1 2

More than 20 working days Nil Nil Nil Nil NilMore than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil


More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) 1 1 Nil 1 1

Internal reviews 2010- 2011- 2012- 2013- 2014-Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

11 12 13 14 15

Internal Reviews Requested Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

Internal Reviews Determined Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

Internal reviews upheld in part Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil




2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

External Reviews Requested Nil Nil Nil 1 Nil

External Reviews Determined Nil Nil Nil Nil 1

External Reviews upheld in full Nil Nil Nil Nil 1




Chapter Nine: Applications received by MinistersIn some cases Department delegates assess applications made to Ministers. Where this has occurred, the figures are incorporated into Department figures in previous chapters.

In some instances Minister’s may receive and assess applications within their Office. This may occur when the information is better described as ‘information in the possession of a Minister’.

The tables below illustrate those Ministerial Offices which have received applications in the reporting period.

Minister for Police and Emergency Management, Minister for Infrastructure


Applications received 5

Applications accepted 3

Applications transferred or part transferred 1

Applications withdrawn Nil

Applications determined 4


Determinations provided in full Nil

Determinations provided in part 4

Determinations refused Nil

Applications not in the possession of the public authority or Minister Nil

Applications subject to an external party review under s 44 Nil


s.5, s.11, s.17 Nil

s.9, s.12 4

s.10, s.19 NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

s.20 Nil

Exemptions 2014-15

s.25 Nil

s.26 3

s.27 4

s.28 Nil

s.29 Nil

s.30 Nil

s.31 Nil

s.32 Nil

s.33 Nil

s.34 Nil

s.35 2

s.36 Nil

s.37 Nil

s.38 1

s.39 1

s.40 Nil

s.41 Nil

s.42 Nil


1-20 working days 4

More than 20 working days Nil

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) Nil

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(b) Nil

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) Nil



Internal Reviews Requested 1

Internal Reviews Determined 1

Internal reviews upheld in part 1

Internal reviews upheld in full Nil

Internal reviews reversed in full Nil

External review 2014:-15

External Reviews Requested 1

External Reviews Determined 1

External Reviews upheld in full 1

External Reviews upheld in part Nil

External Reviews reversed in full Nil

Minister for Education

Number of Applications 2014 -15






Outcome of Applications 2014 -15


Determinations provided in part Nil


Applications not in the possession of the public authority or Minister 1


Reasons for Refusal 2014 -15

s.5, s.11, s.17 Nil

s.9, s.12 NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

s.10, s.19 Nil

s.20 Nil

Exemptions 2014 -15

s.25 Nil

s.26 Nil

s.27 Nil

s.28 Nil

s.29 Nil

s.30 Nil

s.31 Nil

s.32 Nil

s.33 Nil

s.34 Nil

s.35 Nil

s.36 Nil

s.37 Nil

s.38 Nil

s.39 Nil

s.40 Nil

s.41 Nil

s.42 Nil

Time to make decisions 2014 -15

1-20 working days 1

More than 20 working days Nil



More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) Nil

Internal reviews 2014 -15Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

Internal Reviews Requested Nil

Internal Reviews Determined Nil

Internal reviews upheld in part Nil




External Reviews Requested Nil

External Reviews Determined Nil

External Reviews upheld in full Nil



Minister for Resources




Applications transferred or part transferred Nil









Reasons for Refusal 2014 -15

s.5, s.11, s.17 NilRight to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

s.9, s.12 Nil

s.10, s.19 Nil

s.20 Nil

Exemptions 2014 -15

s.25 Nil

s.26 Nil

s.27 Nil

s.28 Nil

s.29 Nil

s.30 Nil

s.31 Nil

s.32 Nil

s.33 Nil

s.34 Nil

s.35 Nil

s.36 Nil

s.37 1

s.38 Nil

s.39 Nil

s.40 Nil

s.41 Nil

s.42 Nil


1-20 working days 2

More than 20 working days 1

More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(4)(a) 1



More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) 1

Internal reviews 2014 -15






External review 2014 -15

External Reviews Requested Nil





Minister for State Growth













Reasons for Refusal 2014 -15Right to Information Annual Report 2014-15 of 77

s.5, s.11, s.17 Nil

s.9, s.12 Nil

s.10, s.19 Nil

s.20 Nil

Exemptions 2014 -15

s.25 Nil

s.26 Nil

s.27 Nil

s.28 Nil

s.29 Nil

s.30 Nil

s.31 Nil

s.32 Nil

s.33 Nil

s.34 Nil

s.35 1

s.36 Nil

s.37 3

s.38 Nil

s.39 2

s.40 Nil

s.41 Nil

s.42 Nil


1-20 working days 1

More than 20 working days 3




More than 20 working days due to extension under s.15(5) 3

Internal reviews 2014 -15






External review 2014 -15

External Reviews Requested 2




External Reviews reversed in full Nil*Two Ombudsman requests were made in the absence of decisions due to an administrative oversight. The two requests were subsequently actioned and the Ombudsman advised.


Appendix 1: List of Government Departments, Councils and Public Authorities as at 30 June 2015Government Departments Department of Education Department of Health and Human

Services^ Department of Justice (including

Workplace Standards) Department of Police and

Emergency Management Department of Premier and Cabinet Department of Primary Industries,

Parks, Water and Environment Department of State Growth Department of Treasury and Finance

Councils Break O’Day Council Brighton Council Burnie City Council Central Coast Council Central Highlands Council Circular Head Council Clarence City Council Derwent Valley Council Devonport City Council Dorset Council Flinders Council George Town Council Glamorgan/Spring Bay Council Glenorchy City Council Hobart City Council Huon Valley Council

Kentish Council King Island Council Kingborough Council Latrobe Council Launceston City Council Meander Valley Council Northern Midlands Council Sorell Council Southern Midlands Council Tasman Council Waratah-Wynyard Council West Coast Council West Tamar Council

Public Authorities Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd Copping Refuse Disposal Site Joint

Authority Dulverton Regional Waste

Management Authority Forest Practices Authority Forestry Tasmania Hydro Tasmania Inland Fisheries Service Integrity Commission Law Society of Tasmania Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania Legal Profession Board of Tasmania Macquarie Point Development

Commission Marine and Safety Tasmania


Metro Tasmania Pty Ltd Motor Accidents Insurance Board Office of the Anti-Discrimination

Commissioner Office of the Tasmanian Economic

Regulator Port Arthur Historic Site

Management Authority Private Forests Tasmania Property Agents Board Retirement Benefits Fund Board Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens

Southern Waste Strategy Authority Tasmanian Building and

Construction Industry Training Board Tasmania Fire Service Tasmanian Public Finance

Corporation Tasports TasWater Teachers Registration Board The Public Trustee University of Tasmania Wellington Park Management Trust

*Note, at July 1 2014, the Department of Economic Development, Tourism and the Arts, and the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources were amalgamated into the Department of State Growth

^Note, for the purposes of this report, the Department of Health and Human Services includes Tasmanian Health Organisations.


GPO Box 825 HOBART TAS 7000Phone: 03 6165 4943 Fax: 03 6233 2332

Email: [email protected] Visit: www.justice.tas.go.au

mailto:[email protected]

right to information annual report 2014 - web viewright to information annual report 2014-15 ......

Documents