- Disclosure of the views of persons or bodies outside government could lead to their increased reluctance to participate in such consultations . (Comment: It was entirely within ASIC's powers to choose who to talk to, and not to talk to Dr Milligan )
- Disclosure of an evaluation of such views by the agency could inhibit ASIC’s ability in future to obtain such assistance . To publish a possibly negative evaluation of the views expressed has the potential to damage relations with those stakeholders.That supports a public interest in non-disclosure of such an evaluation.
- Release of tentative views at an early stage of the decision making process is likely to be misleading .
- The release of confidential advice on strategic matters would inhibit the candour between senior officers  particularly where this could generate ‘undesirable speculation as to the inner workings of Government in respect of matters that are of continuing significance’ . On its own "this may not be a sufficient reason to deny disclosure on the ground of public interest. However, in the context of this case, combined with the argument about tentativeness, the balance shifts to non-disclosure. 
- The views expressed in the document were tentative, and release could ‘create a misleading, perhaps unfair, impression in the minds of readers’  Earlier drafts of later documents need not be disclosed  "It is hard to see what interest the public as a whole or a segment of it would have in knowing the ideas which were canvassed, but not necessarily adopted, along the way. In these circumstances, disclosure could not contribute to the public debate about what the government actually decides and, on balance, it would not be in the public interest to disclose the document." ]52]
- Disclosure would be likely to prejudice participation by stakeholders as it could inhibit frankness and candour in future pre-decisional communications. "This ground has not been accepted as sufficient on its own. In particular evidence is required that disclosure would have a dampening effect.". But "as a matter of general knowledge, it can be accepted that individuals and organisations outside government would be less inclined to provide responses to informal soundings by government if their views are to be published, particularly if there are commercial reasons for non-disclosure." . (Comment: fair enough on the last point unless there are compelling public interests in disclosure.)
- Disclosure could inhibit the integrity and viability of decision-making within ASIC..
and as an instructor would say:
(3) The Parliament also intends, by these objects, to increase recognition that information held by the Government is to be managed for public purposes, and is a national resource.
(2) This section does not limit subsection 11A(5).
(3) Factors favouring access to the document in the public interest include whether access to the document would do any of the following:
(5) In working out whether access to the document would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest, an agency or Minister must have regard to any guidelines issued by the Information Commissioner for the purposes of this subsection under section 93A.