NSW disclosure logs update

The NSW Government Information (Public Access) Act requires each agency to publish on its website as open access information a disclosure log that records access applications that resulted in provision of access to information that may be of interest to other members of the public. Unless publication in this way would be contrary to the public interest.

A quick and far from comprehensive survey last November, five months after the publication requirement commenced, showed many NSW agencies at that stage had posted little or nothing on their disclosure logs. I then had people telling me I had no idea about the lack of resources and their other start up woes, messages received with some but not a lot of sympathy. In this second year of operation Information Commissioner O'Donnell is to take a look at this area of compliance according to the latest OIC news.

In the meantime a recent scan of a sample of agency websites shows things have changed in some instances. The experience confirms NSW lacks the uniformity and ease of access to disclosure logs achieved across federal agencies through adoption of the Australian Information Commissioner's logos scheme on many federal agency home pages.

While this is no competition based on numbers, congratulations to the Department of  Education and Training on the score of being up to date, although a quibble that all information can only be accessed by email request and nothing is posted online. I'd include Police for a commendation as well except you need investigation qualifications to find the log on their website, and if you want any of the released information you have to to fill in and lodge a form. Hardly leading edge.

As to reasons for what amount to nil returns over many months in some other agencies I'm all ears, acknowledging there can be valid lawful reasons for having nothing to post.

Australian Information Commissioner to launch Principles on open public sector information

Australian Information Commissioner Professor John McMillan at the Meta 2011 conference in Canberra today will launch the "Principles on open public sector information" setting out

"the central values of open public sector information: that it be freely available, based on open standards, easily discoverable, understandable, machine-readable, and freely reusable and transformable.”

Though not binding, the principles are welcome statements that form part of the government information framework established by the FOI Act, Privacy Act 1988, Archives Act 1983 and other legislation and the general law.They will be applied by the OAIC when monitoring agency compliance with the publication requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

Let's hope the principles are nailed to the wall alongside the Open Government Declaration of last year,  and incorporated in senior executive and induction training and all points in between until they become second nature across the Australian Public Service. Oh, and brought to the attention of ministers and their staff forcefully and on a regular basis.

The eight principles are a consolidated and redrafted version of ten draft principles published for comment in this issues paper earlier in the year, following consultation and significant public service discussion and debate.The language has been polished to good effect, and most changes represent improvements. Professor McMillan comments about the process in ITnews today. (Update: the OAIC has posted a report on submissions and consideration of issues raised during consultation.)

There has been a little winding back from some aspects of the draft, perhaps reflecting the fact that parts went beyond the strict letter of the law-more's the pity.

For example

• Draft "Principle 1 Open access- a default position" included reference to an agency's "obligation to maximise the amount of information that is published voluntarily, rather than waiting for specific requests under the FOI Act."  Highly desirable spirit and intent stuff, but it didn't make it through probably because the act does not require an agency to publish anything that isn't stipulated, and the Commissioner has no powers to force more. Something less appears in "Principle 7 Appropriate charging for access": "Agencies can reduce the cost of public access by publishing information online, especially information that is routinely sought by the public."

• A cautionary note to not go overboard that was not in the draft appears in the final version of "Principle 4 Robust information asset management", requiring agencies to: "identify data that must be managed in accordance with legislative and legal requirements, including requirements relating to data security and protection of personal information, intellectual property, business confidentiality and legal professional privilege."

• The bean counters appear to have zeroed in on this section of the draft on charging, which had users rejoicing: "The principle of open access to public sector information requires that the cost of access to individuals is not unreasonably restrictive. Appropriate charging for access to information can be achieved by: not charging more than the additional marginal cost of providing access to published information, and in particular excluding from calculation cost associated with producing the information.."   But none of this survived. "Principle 7 Appropriate charging for access" has a more parsimonious tone strictly in accordance with the law: "The FOI Act requires agencies to facilitate public access to information at the lowest reasonable cost. This principle applies when information is provided upon request or is published by an agency. Other Acts also authorise charges for specific documents or information access."  

"Principal 6 Clear reuse rights" includes welcome stronger guidance than in the draft on conditions to be attached: "The default condition should be the Creative Commons BY standard, as recommended in the Intellectual Property Principles for Australian Government Agencies,that apply to agencies subject to the Financial and Management Accountability Act 1997." 

My suggestion that  the draft refer to the need for an agency to have a plan for more open government is partly answered by the reference in Governance to the senior officer "champion" instigating strategic planning on information resource management. There is nothing specific in response to my second suggestion that the Commissioner indicate how progress will be measured, except perhaps this in ITnews:

One of McMillan's few enforcement options will be via the Freedom of Information Act, under which his office is required to monitor how each agency responds to requirements to publish information. (See the Information Publication Scheme which commenced on 1 May, 2011.) “This provides an excellent opportunity to ask them whether they are aware of observing these standards,” he said.

Indeed.

The Principles are
1: Open access to information – a default position
2: Engaging the community
3: Effective information governance
4: Robust information asset management

5: Discoverable and useable information
6: Clear reuse rights
7: Appropriate charging for access
8: Transparent enquiry and complaints processes

The full text follows

May Day means Publication D day in Canberra

The new publication provisions of the Commonwealth Freedom of Information Act took effect from 1 May so these logos are prominent on many agency websites today, and are linked to the documents now required to be published. Prime Minister and Cabinet, Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence are just some that seem to have done a good job and even though others such as Health and Ageing and Immigration and Citizenship don't have the flags flying on the home page, the relevant documents can be found with a little digging. 

Views sought on Publication Scheme and Disclosure logs

The Office of Australian Information Commissioner has two papers out for comment by 28 March, both on aspects of the FOI reforms to commence on 1 May: a Publication Scheme draft using that office as the model, and a Discussion Paper, Disclosure Log.

Bradford District Care Trust (UK)

The Publication Scheme draft (p 8) commendably indicates the OAIC intends to go beyond the mandatory publication requirement to publish additional information about priorities, finances, lists including agency contracts, grants and appointments, and links to data sets, submissions to other bodies, and policies.These (mostly) are the headings used in the UK/ Queensland/Tasmanian publication schemes. An unexplained mystery is why the government chose not to legislate or mandate something along these lines.

The Disclosure Log paper provides guidance on the requirement from 1 May to publish a register of information that has been released under the FOI Act.

"The purpose of the disclosure log is to provide the public with ready access to information that has already been publicly released by an agency or minister. This advances in a practical way the open government objective of the FOI Act. Disclosure logs, together with the Information Publication Scheme that also commences on 1 May 2011, will facilitate a pro-disclosure culture across government."

Some in media circles are concerned about the legislative requirement that information is to be posted to the disclosure log online within ten working days after the FOI applicant was given access to a document, raising the prospect that a journalist applicant having done the hard yards to gain access could be scooped by a competitor who simply crawls the logs. A bigger concern is where an agency or minister publishes information at the same time that it is given to a journalist in response to an FOI request. The suggestion is a delay of at least a few days (the Queensland act gives  at least three days exclusivity to the applicant) would enable the journalist applicant time to analyse the information and possibly write a story for publication.

The paper (pp 14-16) outlines the issue: