Advertisement

How Freedom of Information is costing Victorians millions

Howard Beale in 'Network'

As Howard Beale would say: "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore."

This is how I felt when I received my most recent FOI decision from Victoria’s transport department.

Played expertly by Peter Finch in the movie Network, Beale who inspired people to literally shout these words to the rooftops, is of course fictional, but the unethical and unlawful practices by Victorian FOI officers aren't.

That's not to say they're entirely to blame because not only are their actions condoned by the heads of their departments, but undoubtedly encouraged and rewarded.

Their obvious goal is to frustrate and stall the FOI process even if it means they are ultimately brought to account. But not before a lot of time and in many cases a lot of money is spent by both parties.

As nothing is being done about this, it can only be assumed that such dirty tactics are supported by ministers overseeing the departments but what's more interesting, at least to the Victorian taxpayers, is the millions that must be being spent each year to keep them in the dark.

This is not only the costs borne by their endless fights at VCAT and lawyers, but through outsourcing to organisations which specialise in blocking FOI - most notably FOI Solutions.

This business must be on a very good wicket with government agencies and institutions because it's not just used against applicants, but the FOI Commissioner who is the independent umpire trying to ensure FOI applications are processed lawfully.

This blog is the first part of a weekly series which will expose the techniques and the perpetrators of Victoria's culture of secrecy.

While there are pockets of dodgy practices employed by FOI officers in WA and SA, which will be dissected at a later date, nowhere is it more endemic than Victoria.

Ultimately, it's hoped the true cost to the Victorian public will also be exposed but since the figure is dependent on dozens of FOIs which will no doubt be fought against at every juncture, that will take time.

It's no secret that Victorian Government agencies are notoriously difficult to deal with when it comes to FOI and its officers are trained to frustrate, thwart and ultimately block FOI applications.

However, what’s become increasingly apparent is, unlike other interstate agencies who honour previous decisions against them, Victorian agencies just keep repeating their wrong decisions, knowing that they’ll eventually be called to account but that it will take the better part of a year before that happens.

Nowhere has this been more evident than in relation to a recent, very simple FOI application by the Seven Network to the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources for footage of one incident.

This is not an onerous application, but comparatively simple and easy when the usual quota for incidents is up to 30 – or at least that’s as many as Victoria Police will accept at a time.

This week, Seven News will run a story out of Queensland based on 31 incidents of erratic driving provided under the equivalent FOI legislation by the state’s transport department.

Yet, Victoria’s transport department can’t provide footage of three cameras capturing the one incident with the personal details of anyone captured in the footage pixelated so they can’t be identified? Bear in mind, that Seven pays for the pixilation to be undertaken, not the department.

This was after their original decision denying access in its entirety was overturned by the FOI Commissioner forcing them to make a “fresh decision”.

But rather than playing fair and providing access to the information as per their obligations under the FOI Act, FOI manager Andrew Weston claims that the provision of more than one camera angle is an “unreasonable burden on departmental resources”, even though they’ve provided more than three incidents of pixelated footage under FOI legislation before.

The excuse is unclearly untrue.

It appears there is now a “block at all costs” tactic employed by Victorian Government departments. If they fail to capitulate after another decision against them by the FOI Commissioner, they’ll be forced to go to VCAT which is very expensive, as are the lawyers they employ to represent them.

This is compared to them just processing the application at no additional cost to taxpayers because that’s their job. How is this acting in the public’s interest?

Instead, the Victorian Government would prefer taxpayers fork out money unnecessarily just so they can preserve their culture of secrecy.

Both Transport Minister Jacinta Allan and the department’s Secretary Richard Bolt were asked if they condone these unethical, unlawful and expensive practices but refused to comment.

Alison Sandy is the Seven Network’s FOI Editor