Office of the Attorney-General 23 February 2015 Mr Josh Taylor Senior Journalist Net.com CBS Interactive — Tech and News Level 12, 50 Goulburn St Sydney NSW 2000 By email only: josh.taylor@zdnet.com.au Dear Mr Taylor Freedom of Information Request no. AGO-FOI2014/40 The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a decision about access to documents that you requested under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). 1, Paul O'Sullivan, Chief of Staff, am an officer authorised under s. 23(1) of the FOI Act to make decisions in relation to FOI requests. Background (1) On 11 December 2014 you made a request to the Attomney-General’s Department (the Department) for access to documents under the FOI Act regarding: «...access to records of Attomey-General George Brandis’ meetings with intemet service providers, copyright lobby groups such as the Australian Screen Association, film studios, and consumer groups over the matter of copyright infringement between February 1, 2014 and December 11, 2014.” Summary (2) ___Thave identified six documents which fall within the scope of your request. (3) Inrelation to the documents you requested (set out in the schedule attached), I have decided to grant access to an edited version of six documents. More information, including my reasons for my decision, is set out below. Material taken into account (4) Thave taken the following material into account in making my decision: (a) the content of the document that falls within the scope of your request;(b) the FOI Act (sp lly ss, 22 and 47F); (©) the guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under s. 9A of the FOI Act; and (@) the views of third parties consulted by the this Office in accordance with the FOI Guidelines. Decision and reasons for decision (5) Inrelation to the documents identified in the attached schedule, I have decided: (@) to grant access in part to documents 1, 2, 3 and 4, with irrelevant matter deleted under s. 22 (‘Access 10 edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted’) ands, 47F (‘Personal privacy’); and (b) fo grant access in part to documents 5 and 6, with personal information del under s, 47F (“Personal privacy’) Irrelevant material (s. 22) (6) Section 22(1) of the FOI Act relevantly provides: Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted Scope (1) This section applies if: (a) an agency ot Minister decides: to refuse to give access to an exempt document; or Gi) that give access to-@ document would disclose information that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the request for a and (b) it is possible for the agency or Minister to prepare a copy (an edited copy) of the document, modified by deletions, ensuring that: (H access to the edited copy would be required to be given under s. L1A (access to documents on request); and (ii) the edited copy would not disclose any information that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the reques (7) Lam satisfied that some material in the document is irrelevant to your request. Accordingly, I have omitted this material from the document and given access to the edited copy under s, 11A of the FOI Act. Personal privacy (8. 47F) (8) Section 47F(1) of the FOI Act provides: 478 Public interest conditional exemptions—personal privacy General rule(1) A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person). (9) Section 4 of the FOI Act provides that ‘personal information’ has the same meaning as in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (the Privacy Act). Section 6 of the Privacy Act provides that: personal information means information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable: (a) whether the information is true or not; and (b) whether the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not. (10) Personal information can include a person’s name, address or telephone number (OAIC Guidelines at 6.117). For the information or opinion to be personal information, the individual’s identity needs to be apparent, or reasonably ascertainable. The Information Commissioner suggests that, generally, the individual’s identity needs to be reasonably ascertainable by the applicant. The ability of an applicant to reasonably ascertain an individual’s identity will depend on the context of the circumstances. (11) _ The personal privacy exemption is designed to prevent the unreasonable invitation of the third parties’ privacy.’ The test of unreasonableness implies a need to balance the public interest in disclosure of government-held information and the private interest in the privacy of individuals. The test does not however amount to the public interest test of s 11AG), which follows later in the decision making process. (12) A number of third parties were consulted regarding the release of personal information in accordance with section 27A of the FOI Act. A minister must have regard for any submissions made before deciding whether to give access to the documents (ss 27A(3) and 27A(4)), (13) Following consultation with third parties, I am satisfied that parts of document 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 contain personal information that should be exempt from disclosure. For example, documents 1, 2 and 3 contain personal mobile numbers and email addresses. Further, documents 4, 5 and 6 contain the names of junior officers in the Office of the Attorney-General, (14) Lam also satisfied that disclosure of the personal information in the document is unreasonable, (15) Section 47F(2) of the FOL Act specifies a number of matters to which I, as the decision maker, must have regard to, in deciding whether the disclosure of the document would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information, " See Australian Law Reform Commission, For Your Information: Ausralian Privacy Law and Practice, Report 108, 2008, paragraph 6.54, See also Auniom Aspergers Advocacy Australia and Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2012] AICmr 28 ‘See Re Chandra and Minister for Immigration and Ente Affairs [1984] AATA 437; Parnell and Department of te Prine Minister and Cabinet [2012] AICme 31; ‘R" and Department of Immigration and Citizenship [2012] AICne 32.a) ayy Public (18) (19) (20) Ql) (22) 1 am not satisfied that any public purpose would be achieved through the release of the personal information in the document. Furthermore, I am not persuaded that the personal information is of any demonstrable relevance to the affairs of government. On the basis of the foregoing considerations, I am satisfied that disclosure of the personal information in the document is unreasonable. I have decided, therefore, that the personal information in the document is conditionally exempt under s. 47F of the FOI Act. interest considerations Section 11A(S) of the FOI Act provides that, if a document is conditionally exempt, it must be disclosed ‘unless (in the circumstances) access to the document at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest’. As the Guidelines explain, ‘[t]he pro-disclosure principle declared in the objects of the FOI Aet is given specific effect in the public interest test, as the test is weighted towards disclosure” (at [6.12]). ‘The documents in scope contain confidential personal information about a number of individuals’ telephone numbers and email addresses. On the basis of the foregoing considerations, I am satisfied that disclosure of the personal information in the document is unreasonable. I have decided, therefore, that the personal information in the document is conditionally exempt under s. 47F of the FOI Act. Of the factors favouring disclosure set out in s. 11B(3) of the FOI Act, I have identified ‘fa ite the objects of the FOI Act’ as relevant in this case. I consider that personal information contained in the documents is unlikely to contribute significantly to promotion of Australia’s representative democracy. Having had regard to all the relevant factors — for and against disclosure — I am satisfied that the factors against disclosure outweigh those in favour of disclosure. I consider therefore that access to material discussed above in the document would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest and access should not be granted under 11A@) of the FOI Act. Your review rights If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may apply for Information Commissioner Review of the decision. You cannot ask for internal review of an original decision made by a Minister or an authorized member of his staff. Also, the Commissioner cannot investigate a complaint about how the Minister handled your FOI request. Information Commissioner Review Under section S41 of the FOI Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to review my decision. An application for review by the Information Commissioner must be made in writing within 60 days of the date of this letter, and be lodged in one of the following ways:online: https://forms, business. gov.au/aba/oaic/foi-review-/ email: enquiries@oaic.gov.au post: GPO Box 2999, Canberra ACT 2601 inperson: Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW More information about Information Commissioner review is available on the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner website. Questions about this decision If you wish to discuss this decision, please contact the Office of the Attorney-General on (02) 6277 7300. Yours sincerely Paul O'Sullivan Chief of Staff(Sen G, Brandis) ‘9am (ACT) Keynote address at the Australia Digital Alliance Forum Subje ISEC@UNCLASSIFIED] Location: National Library, Canberra Start: Fri 14/02/2014 8:00 AM End: Fri 4/02/2014 8:30 AM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: ‘Accepted Organizer: Brandis, George Required Attendees: Brandis, George (Senator) (Senator.Brandis@aph.gov.au); Lambie, James ames Lambie@ag.gov.au) Categories: 4G ref requested 17/12/13 bear BB ‘That is wonderful news. On behalf of the ADA please pass on our deepest thanks to the Attorney-General. We, and the forum attendees, are looking forward to hearing | his address. ‘The current proposed timetable for the forum Is: 8:30 Registrations open 18:00 Welcome and introduction of Attorney General (Derek Whitehead OAM) ‘9:10 Opening Address, Senator the Hon George Brandis QC, Attorney General, ‘The address would be scheduled to finish at 9:30am. However we are happy to change this to suit the Attorney, we can elther move the intreduction forward (to say 8:50) or we can lengthen or shorten the Attorney's speaking time as required. seas etme enow what would su, ether va emal or on ZEEE or EER vou would be aware the Forum will be held at the National Library of Australia. With sincerest thanks Trish Hepworth | Aistratian Digital Alliance | Australian Libraries Copyright Committee lel | wError! Hyperlink reference not valid.> | a National Library of Australia, Par2:45pm Meeting with Dan Rosen, CEO of ARIA re: copyright reform {SEC=UNCLASSIFIED} M670 Fri 24/10/2014 AS PM Fri 24/20/2014 2:5 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting status: Accepted Organizer: Brandis, George Required Attendees: George Brandl; Faulks, Joshua ©} Phonographie Performance Company of Australia Lovel 4, 11-17 Buckingham Street, Surry Hills, NSW, 2010 PO Box G20 Queen Vietoria Building, NSW, 1280 : 02 8569 1100 | f: 02 8569 1189. | web: ynviv.ppeA.com.auRecurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: 43:00pm Meeting with Graham Burke (Village Roadshow) [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 4 Treasury Place, East Melbourne Thu 18/09/2014 3:00 PM ‘Thu 18/09/2014 3:30 PM (none) Accepted Brancls, George George Brancis; James Lambie amesiambie@ag.gov.au)Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Categories: (iss ef Gam Burk ‘45pm Meeting with Graham Burke, CEO Vilage Roadshow MG70 ‘Tue 26/08/2014 4:15 PM ‘Tue 26/08/2014 4:45 PM (vone) Accepted Brandis, George George Brandis; Napthaf, Michel Ans (Go-Exacutivo Chanan, Co-Chiv Executive Offcor iia Roadshorr Lito 00 Chops! She. Sou Varta Vic 3145 pore Prien Vic 10Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: ‘40pm Meeting with Francis Gury, Diector General of the World Intellect Property Organization [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] ‘Sydney Law Courts ‘Mon 18/08/2014 4:30 PM ‘Mon 18/08/2014 5:00 PM (none) Accepted Brandis, George George Brandis; Lambie, JomesSubject: 12:30pm Meeting with broadcasting delegation re online Pray [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Location: MG70 Start: “Tue 17/06/2014 1230 PM End Tue 17/05/2014 3:00 PM Recurrence: (one) ‘Meeting Status: Accepted organizer: Brandis, George Required Attendees: George Brandis; Faulks, soshus; Napthal Michael Dear Mr Meagher Is there availability to meet with the Attorney 3t either 10:00am on Monday 26" June, or 12:30pm on, Tuesday 17" june? please let me know at your earliest convenience, ‘office af the Attorney-General and Minister for the Arts Deputy Leader ofthe Government inte Senate 1.02 6277 7300 | Original Message From: Bruce Meagher (SYD) Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 20 ‘To: Faulks, Josi Subject: Fivd: Mecting request Josh Hore is the email | did send it to James. ‘Cheers Sent from my iPadDear James sotto addegaton ofan sen puts arash Casha co ands Wo wae aa Attorney to pt ther perspective on the online lacy issue, Was hop We able to arrange a meeting on the JRernoon of 16 June, We could also do the morning of the ya ah ee a a ED rs go we might be able 1 squeeze something in just afterwards. | | \ I | ‘Would you be abe to et me know ifthat will be possible? ‘Many thanks Bruce Meagher Group Director, Corporate Affairs