Lead

A new audit report has found that Australia's Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Treasury, and the Department of Infrastructure rejected nearly 80% of freedom of information (FOI) requests, drawing sharp criticism from transparency advocates and crossbench politicians. The report, prepared by the Australian National Audit Office, describes a system marked by "resistance and delay," with no consistent or transparent decision-making and inadequate record-keeping.

Coverage Comparison

The findings were reported by The Guardian, which highlighted both the statistical scope of the problem and specific practices that appeared designed to limit public access. One article focused on the overall dysfunction, while a second delved into Treasury's use of Friday-afternoon releases and other delaying tactics. Both pieces drew on the audit report, expert commentary, and political reactions.

Key Claims

According to the audit report, as summarized by The Guardian, 79% of FOI applications to the three audited departments were refused in full or in part in the last financial year, and 57% of applications resulted in no documents being released at all. The report also found that 63% of requests exceeded the legally mandated 30-day response period, and among decisions appealed to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, 62% were overturned or changed, suggesting that initial refusals were often unjustified.

The audit examined a sample of more than 43,000 applications received by the departments in 2024-25. It found that the departments lacked appropriate policies and procedures to meet transparency obligations. For example, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Treasury, and the Department of Infrastructure did not maintain complete disclosure logs, and their records of searches for documents were inadequate. The report stated that the entities "are unable to demonstrate that they have met the obligation to take all reasonable steps to find requested documents."

One notable practice uncovered by the audit was Treasury's tendency to withhold documents until Fridays. In nearly half of the 155 applications where the day of release was known, decisions were delayed to the end of the week—a move that critics say is designed to minimize media attention. The audit also found that Treasury had no formal policy for handling requests, despite a draft set of rules from 2023 that referenced five "procedure documents" that did not exist.

The report comes amid a broader rise in FOI applications, which increased by 25% across government last financial year, according to data cited in the audit. This surge, combined with the high refusal rate, has raised concerns about the government's commitment to transparency.

Perspectives

Gabrielle Appleby, head of research at the Centre for Public Integrity, told The Guardian that the audit report was meant to provide parliament with assurance that the system was working, but instead exposed significant failures. She said the culture within the departments was one of "resistance and delay," contrary to the pro-disclosure objectives of the FOI Act.

Independent Senator David Pocock criticized the government's timing in releasing its formal response to a parliamentary inquiry on gambling advertising on the same day as the federal budget, calling it "cowardly." Crossbench MP Monique Ryan described the move as "the height of political cynicism." These comments were reported in The Guardian's coverage and reflect broader dissatisfaction with the government's approach to releasing information.

While the audit focused on three specific departments, the findings are likely to fuel ongoing debates about government transparency. Some observers note that the high refusal rate may be partly due to the nature of the requests, but the audit's evidence of procedural shortcomings suggests systemic issues. The government has not yet publicly responded to the audit's findings, but the report is expected to be considered by parliamentary committees.

The audit also noted that the government had ignored calls to properly fund independent watchdogs, including the Australian National Audit Office itself, which could affect oversight capabilities in the future. This point, reported by The Guardian, adds another layer to the transparency concerns, as watchdog capacity is crucial for holding the executive branch to account.

Conclusion

The audit report paints a concerning picture of FOI administration within key Australian government departments. With nearly eight in ten requests refused, and many refusals later overturned on review, the system appears to be failing its purpose of ensuring government accountability. The report's findings have prompted calls for reform, but the government has yet to indicate how it will address these shortcomings.