Ms Roxon asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 1 March 2004:

(1) Can the Minister indicate (a) whether the Minister's department has a dedicated Freedom of Information (FOI) officer, and (b) how many officers are employed to deal with FOI requests, and (c) at what levels they are employed.

(2) How many applications did the department have under the FOI Act in the 2002-2003 financial year and how did this figure compare to previous years.

(3) How many internal reviews of applications occurred in the last financial year and how many internal reviews affirmed the original decision.

(4) Can the information in (2) and (3) be broken down into applications requesting individual information and applications requesting information for other reasons (i.e. media, opposition MPs etc).

(5) What proportion of cases go to external review and what proportion of these are upheld.

(6) In respect of fees for FOI applications, (a) how much was charged, (b) how much was actually collected, and (c) what proportion of fees were waived.

(7) How much did the Minister's department spend in defending FOI appeals.

(8) In respect of refusals to grant requests, can the Minister provide details on (a) which exemption categories are used when information is refused, and (b) what proportion of refusals are in each category (i.e. commercial-in-confidence and other categories).

(9) Will the Minister provide statistics over the last 5 years indicating whether the use of particular exemption categories is static, falling or increasing.

Mr Abbott (Minister for Health and Ageing) —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1) (a), (b) and (c)

The Department of Health and Ageing (the Department) has a dedicated Freedom of Information (FOI) Officer.

Receipt of FOI requests and processing advice is undertaken by 0.5 of an APS6 employee, and 0.4 of an APS3 employee. In addition, 0.4 of a Legal 1 employee provides legal advice on processing of FOI requests to departmental decision makers.

FOI requests, following their receipt, are forwarded to a delegated decision maker within the program area to which the request relates. There are no other staff in the Department employed to deal with FOI requests. However, there are a number of staff who, because of their official duties, become involved, from time to time, in particular FOI requests - such as the delegated decision maker in a program area to which the request relates.

(2) In the 2002-2003 financial year, the Department had 132 FOI applications. A comparison of FOI applications for the previous three years reveals that: for 2001-2002, 97 applications were received; for 1999-2000, 74 applications were received; and for 1998-1999, 114 applications were received.

(3) Five internal reviews of applications occurred in the last financial year. One internal review affirmed the original decision.

(4) The information in questions (2) and (3) has been broken down as follows: In 2002 - 2003, four applications were received which requested access to documents containing personal information; and 128 applications were received requesting access to documents which contain information other than personal information.

(5) For the 2002 - 2003 financial year, three applications were lodged for external review with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), of which, two applications are still before the AAT. The third application was withdrawn by the applicant, without concession by the Department.

(6) (a), (b) and (c) The Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) prescribes charges of a $30.00 application fee for an FOI request, and a $40.00 application fee for an internal review request. There are also processing charges, such as, for search and retrieval, decision making time, and photocopying of documents.

Application fees charged for the 2002 - 2003 financial year, were $3,650.00 with the total amount being collected.

Processing charges notified to applicants, for the 2002 - 2003 financial year, were $72,904.00, with the total amount collected being $9,905.00.

Nine percent of application fees were waived in the 2002 - 2003 financial year. The FOI Act does not require agencies to collect information on waived processing charges. As such, the Department does not collect this information. For the Department to provide an accurate figure on the proportion of charges waived, would require an unreasonable diversion of resources.

(7) The Department did not have any expenditure associated with defending FOI appeals.

(8) (a), (b) The exemption provisions predominantly used by the Department, in the 2002 - 2003 financial year, and the amount of requests that applied these exemptions, are outlined in the table below.

It should be noted, each FOI request may involve a number of documents, and more than one exemption may be claimed over each document.

(9) The FOI Act does not require agencies to collect statistics on particular use of exemption categories. As such, the Department does not collect this information. For the Department to collate statistics on particular use of exemption categories, over a five-year period, would require an unreasonable diversion of resources.