Information and privacy commissioner Angelene Falk has three weeks to respond to an explosive 18-page statement from former colleague Leo Hardiman delivered at an FoI parliamentary committee yesterday.
Former freedom of information commissioner Hardman said Falk put administrative obstacles in the way of completing a review into the speed of FoI decisions, among other allegations.
Hardiman resigned from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) in March.
In a morning session of the committee hearing, Hardiman alleged the OAIC’s FoI function was deliberately under-resourced, staff were used for tasks other than FoI-related work, and Falk manufactured narratives related to review completions and resourcing.
Falk used her statement in the afternoon session to outline the OAIC’s remit and seek time to respond to Hardiman’s detailed statement.
“This morning senators heard testimony from the former FoI commissioner,” Falk said. “I take issue with a number of the statements, points made and claims.
“I will seek to answer your questions, but I note that the evidence was only provided this morning and I have had very limited opportunity to consider the matters.
“I would like a reasonable opportunity to respond, thank you.”
Falk was given until September 22 to submit her response.
Greens senator David Shoebridge asked Falk to explain the staffing resource allocation during the animated senate committee hearing.
Shoebridge pointed to evidence Hardiman gave earlier that day that the low staffing allocation to the job meant the FoI team was unable to do its job properly.
Falk told the committee that she was acutely aware of resourcing issues and that she made eight budget bids during the five years she has been at the helm of the OAIC.
She said the evidence presented by Hardiman to the committee gave the impression of a series of conversations about resourcing and budget allocation but that she could only recall one conversation.
“There was one passing remark and the matter was not raised with me to the best of my recollection other than that one occasion,” Falk said.
Falk was also asked by committee chair Paul Scarr why she did not refer to Hardiman contemplating his resignation during a senate estimates appearance earlier this year when she was asked about resourcing issues in her office.
“I must say that I probably didn’t attach a lot of weight to the remark he made at the time,” Falk said. “It seemed to be a passing remark in the context of talking about the budget.”
She later said that the evidence provided by Hardiman helped her recall a remark provided through a video meeting the two had relating to his resignation.
:
Hardiman accuses information commissioner of FoI ‘spin’ and culture issues
