Senate Estimates is an annual event. For Governments it is a mandatory evil. For oppositions it promises to reveal a cornucopia of a information to embarrass the government and burnish its credentials. For the agencies, in particular the public servants who front the various Estimates Committees, it is a burden to be carried as part of the job. This year the Information Commissioner’s attendance before the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee proved to be no different. The Commissioner’s opening statement was the usual anodyne, nothing to see here, statement providing.
With the chair’s leave I take this opportunity to acknowledge the committee’s role and in doing so provide a brief opening statement outlining the important work of the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).
I appear today with the assistance of the FOI Commissioner Ms Toni Pirani and with the chair’s leave the Privacy Commissioner Ms Carly Kind appearing via link and Executive General Manager, Information Rights Ms Ashleigh McDonald.
Supported by our new organisational structure we are better positioned to operate as a contemporary and proactive regulator. Some of our recent initiatives and outcomes demonstrate our future direction. We have:
-
- commenced preliminary inquiries into the privacy impacts of connected vehicles
- commenced the development of a Children’s Online Privacy Code
- developed a public facing dashboard to ensure that agency freedom of information (FOI) data is reported and presented more effectively
- We will shortly deliver a report examining the use of messaging apps by Australian government agencies
- We are building our strategic intelligence capabilities.
To deliver a proactive and contemporary regulatory approach to benefit the Australian community, agencies and industry alike, we will also focus on building staffing capabilities through an investment in new ways of working and professional development. Within our budgetary parameters, our technology and systems will also be a focus to support our new direction.
However, we are also mindful to deal with our core case management responsibilities and reduce our backlog in both FOI and privacy cases. Our resources are challenged by a 25% increase in FOI Information Commissioner review (IC review) applications compared to the same period last year. This is against a backdrop of an increase in FOI IC review applications over the last 5 years that is estimated to double the number of FOI IC review applications received in 2019–20. We also face an overall growth in privacy case work and increasing complexity in our case work arising from digital services and emerging technologies. This has a particular impact on our privacy case work.
Our enforcement capabilities have been assisted by an increase of funding in recognition of the complexities of enforcement. Similarly designated funding has been provided to the OAIC to develop the Children’s Online Privacy Code and guidance regarding the social media age limit.
Our appearance and preparatory papers are informed by data as at 15 January 2025. However, to assist the committee, as at 23 February 2025 the OAIC 2024–25 case statistics are as follows:
-
- 1,279 FOI review applications were received and 1,494 finalised.
- 196 FOI complaints were received and 216 finalised.
- 1,966 privacy complaints were received and 1,687 finalised.
During this period, we also finalised a number of complex privacy matters that have delivered a strong enforcement message and importantly established our expectations of the regulated community. In doing so, we are upholding the rights of privacy and information access enshrined in statute by the Australian Parliament and better serving the values and expectations of the Australian community.
I wish to acknowledge the significant work and expertise of the OAIC leadership in taking forward this major change program and recognise with gratitude OAIC staff for their dedication and commitment as we secure the fundamental human rights of privacy and information access in an increasingly complex environment.
The hearing before the Estimates Committee focused on the reduction in staffing in the office from 200 to 138 staff in the Office. A 23% reduction in staff. Also of interest is the Privacy Commissioner’s admission that the the findings of the Property Lovers determination is not being complied with. In short, the behaviour complained of is continuing. The Privacy Commissioner is investigating what to do next.
An understaffed office is bad news for effective regulation. That has been a chronic problem for this office. Fortunately there will be a statutory tort as of June 2025 so in many cases individuals will not need to rely on the Commissioner taking up an investigation from a member of the public.
The Transcript provides:
CHAIR: With 20 minutes to go in our hearing, we’re going to politely and apologetically, dismiss the Australian Human Rights Commission. We won’t get to them this evening. We thank them for their time and for travelling. We do have questions for them, but we won’t have time to put them. We thank them for their ongoing work, particularly in the current environment. I know they’re working very hard. So thank you very much.
Welcome, commissioners. Do you have an opening statement you’d like to table?
Ms Tydd : I do have a very brief opening statement and I’m happy to table that.
CHAIR: Thank you very much. That will be circulated to senator so they can read from that when they have it in front of them. In the meantime, I’ll pass the call to Senator Scarr.
Senator SCARR: Commissioner, how many staff have left the OAIC since August last year?
Ms Tydd : I don’t think I could speak with authority from the date of August, but I can give you the very high-level numbers of staffing pre and post our organisational redesign.
Senator SCARR: Can you give me the dates for the organisational redesign, so I can calibrate that with my August date.
Ms Tydd : Yes. That was finalised in mid-November, about 17 November. The organisational redesign responded to our significant budgetary situation, in which we would be operating at a deficit. Action was taken around that. At the time, in July, we had an FTE of just over 200. Our organisational redesign that allowed us to operate within our budgetary parameters—
Senator SCARR: Sorry; it’s late. I’ve got to get these numbers right. In July your FTE was just over 200?
Ms Tydd : Correct. And our ASL cap came down to 173. We knew that within our budgetary parameters we’d need to operate at around 165. We didn’t purely look at staffing levels in relation to meeting our budgetary parameters; we looked at a range of measures. They included external supply costs. Legal costs were something that we focused on as well. So, yes, we were required to reduce staffing in response to our revised budgetary parameters, and that process was completed around mid-November.
Senator SCARR: Okay. What were the FTE numbers as at mid-November, when you completed that process?
Ms Tydd : There probably was still some lag. I’d say it would be about 175. I’ll see if I have any dates that will help you further. I can tell you that as at 18 December, as we were still working through that process, our staffing level was 175.
Senator SCARR: Do you have the data as at today or the most recent data as at the end of the month? Do you have any most recent data?
Ms Tydd : As at 29 January, it was 138.4.
Senator SCARR: So you went from 175 as at 18 December—that was the figure you gave?—
Ms Tydd : Correct.
Senator SCARR: to 138.4 as at 29 January?
Ms Tydd : That’s correct, with a headcount of 156.
Senator SCARR: Okay, so you’ve got part-time—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: So as we don’t have to traverse across this, do you mind if I ask: you’ve been talking FTE all the time through, so these have all been the same dataset of FTE, full-time equivalents?
Ms Tydd : Yes.
Senator SCARR: So you went from—we’ll try and use the common terminology—FTE as at 18 December of 175 to FTE as at 29 January, which is only a month later, of 156. Is that correct?
Ms Tydd : The figure I have is 138.4.
Senator SCARR: 175 to 138.4?
Ms Tydd : Yes. They’re the figures I have before me. Read the rest of this entry »