Right to Information falls at final hurdle…

[Fares_Fair]

Right to Information falls at final hurdle...

"I received an extraordinary call from the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC)."
"This was in response to my Right to Information request, no. RTI-150, lodged with Queensland Rail (QR) in March 2011."
"This had been appealed internally to QR with no change in the outcome, so I lodged an external appeal via the OIC."

"In the call, I was told that the bulk of the documents produced by Queensland Rail (QR) in response to my request, were administrative in nature, and therefore in the opinion of the OIC, did not comply with my original request for information."
The request ...
All documents giving advice to State and Federal Governments regarding infrastructure requirements for the North Coast Line from Brisbane to Gympie North from September 2008 to March 2011."This is made more strange by the fact that QR clearly thought they did comply, in supplying them to the OIC for its determination."

I have a letter from QR dated 6 June, 2011 that states "I am satisfied that the documents identified are relevant to your request." unquote.

"Further this response came only after QR were offered the opportunity to provide more evidence to support their claim for the retention of the documents."
"In this instance it appears that the 'independent' OIC were acting in the interests of Queensland Rail, against the interests of public accountability."

"The only documents agreed to be produced by QR after the OIC appeal were a couple of Questions on Notice made in the Qld Parliament, and therefore already on the public record."
"Earlier documents released following my initial request were Ministerial Briefing notes that revealed the following;
1.   the rail duplication works that ended prematurely at Beerburrum in April 2009 achieved nothing for the rail line, and won't do so until the rail duplication is completed to Landsborough;
2.   that QR feared the 'negative media impact' of food shortages to North Qld during the commissioning period of that rail line;
3.   the astonishing weekly rental costs and lack of a plan to address the temporary (for 19 years?) railway platforms located at 7 Sunshine Coast stations.

"Apparently, from the results of my year-long RTI request, it would appear that Queensland Rail do NOT provide advice to either the state or the federal government, on infrastructure requirements to the North Coast Line, which includes the Caboolture & Sunshine Coast rail lines."
"This is of course extraordinary, and indeed unbelievable, given that QR, as a service provider under a Transport Services Contract to TRANSLink, would have no say in what it sees as necessary for the efficient and reliable running of its' rail network along the North Coast Line."

"This raises 2 very important questions;"
1.   "If Queensland Rail, as a service provider, does not provide advice to the Government on what it needs, then who does?"
2.   "If there was no advice available under the RTI request, then why did they spend over a year defending the release of information?"

"So much for openness and accountability!"
"It's appalling and indicates a culture of unnecessary secrecy."
"No wonder we constantly have power failures, track faults and signal faults, and according to QR, no-one's telling anyone how to fix it."

I can only hope that the audit initiated into Queensland Rail by the new Transport Minister, the Hon Scott Emerson, on April 12, sheds light on this situation.
http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=78972
Its' last line states; Queensland Rail will co-operate fully with the audit, and the auditor will be given free access to all previous Queensland Rail reports, audits and studies.
But according to my RTI request, there aren't any.


Kind Regards,

Jeff Addison (name used with permission)
Sunshine Coast commuter advocate
Campaigner for rail duplication of the North Coast Line

[Stillwater]

So, is it the Department of Transport and Main Roads that provides briefing to government, not QR?

The results of this RTI request follows your earlier disclosures, FF, that QR has refused to provide information of an operational nature about the Sunshine Coast Line to the relevant CRG.  What has QR to hide?

The most frustrating conclusion is that despite all the reports to government about the SCL, no-one in government is acting on that advice.  No work on the detailed planning for the Beerburrum-Landsborough upgrade....no further preconstruction activity for the duplication from there to Nambour..... no action on the upcoming freight handling disaster facing the line (freight volumes on the North Coast Line out of Brisbane is anticipated to increase from 3.18 mtpa in 2003 to 4.5 mtpa in 2013 and 5.5 mtpa in 2020, if rail capacity is provided).... no linkages between improved passenger rail (as opposed to railbuses) and population growth (Caloundra South and Palmview) .... zip, nothing.

It's remarkable that the LNP government's position on the SCL is the same as the ALP's, yet wall-to-wall LNP representation on the Sunshine Coast with the exception of the Nicklin independent.

[Stillwater]

As with CRR, the planning should be in place for when a few more $$$ return to the Budget.  Maybe the Translink CEO, Mr Scales, will seek to better inform himself about the SCL come the middle of the month.

[#Metro]

Courier Mail?

[ozbob]

It's remarkable that the LNP government's position on the SCL is the same as the ALP's, yet wall-to-wall LNP representation on the Sunshine Coast with the exception of the Nicklin independent.

I commend you for your efforts but the bit above, do you really find this surprising?

From what I can work out, LAB basically ran out of money to continue at the time and things have not improved since and LNP are using the same empty basket. However they are only in power under 2mths and it will take them a good 12mths to probably give it a detailed look with other competing projects and prioritise. Priority No.1 I think is for Newman to pull $2B out of the budget.

regards
Shane

The LNP are well aware of the SCL need.  Throughout 2011 they were very vocal locally condemning the ALP for not proceeding with upgrades, particularly Beerburrum to Landsborough.  Now the the ball is in their court they are falling back on the money excuse and mostly remaining silent.  All part of the con to get elected ... lol

[ozbob]

@Fares_Fair.  What are the appeal processes in any, ask the OIC. 

If they claim there is not any I would make a representation to the Premier and Minister for Transport.

[Fares_Fair]

@Fares_Fair.  What are the appeal processes in any, ask the OIC. 

If they claim there is not any I would make a representation to the Premier and Minister for Transport.

The only (verbal) advice received via the OIC was that I make RTI requests to the Dept of Transport and Main Roads and the Office of Infrastructure and Planning.
But I cannot afford (time-wise) to wage another year-long battle for information on two fronts when I know that they DO provide advice.
A Right to Information request costs $38, or it did back in March 2011.

It's simply unbelievable NOT to get any advice under this appeal, apart from 2 Questions on Notice already on the public record.

I have received further advice and am in the process of pursuing it.
It doesn't end here.

I may well pursue that as an option also, ozbob.
The public do indeed have a right to know what the infrastructure issues are with the North Coast Line and what advice Queensland Rail has provided to Government to improve the services that they provide.

[Fares_Fair]

This QoN below clearly provides advice to the Government.
Surely they wouldn't have us believe that they DO NOT provide advice to Government or Government departments aside from Questions on Notice.

But that is what my RTI suggests.

Question on Notice No. 1900, of Tuesday, 2 December 2008 and made by Mr Peter Wellington, Independent (Nicklin).

QR Passenger Pty Ltd advises that it is restricted in the number of services it can provide
to the Sunshine Coast due to the fact that the line is also an extremely busy freight line,
operating on single track working north of Caboolture.
Excerpt above is opening paragraph.

It must acknowledge that although Stage 1 will be commissioned in the near future,
additional services will not be allowed at this point.
Stage 1 refers to Caboolture to Beerburrum, commissioned April 14, 2009 (Easter that year).

QR Passenger Pty Ltd will continue to run rail bus services to supplement the rail services.
Patronage data indicates that this is currently adequate.
Excerpt above is closing sentence.

[Stillwater]

The SCL rail buses do not run full and, hence, are 'adequate for the patronage' because they take half as much time again as a train to cover the same distance, also people heading to and from Brisbane avoid them to catch the train instead.

[ozbob]

Yes, that is a rubbish line of course ' adequate for patronage '  ...

My travels on the Sunshine Coast line I much prefer rail for obvious reasons.

[Stillwater]

As to the latest petition calling in the LNP Government to duplicate the SCL to Nambour, let us not forget Petition No. 1565-10 lodged with the Legislative Assembly by Mr Andrew Powell MP, Member for Glass House, on 16 February 2011 in support of the need to 'fast track' the rail upgrade from Beerburrum to Nambour.

[Arnz]

Dont forget the Railbuses that run at the same time as the train departures; 3:15pm and 5:52pm from Caboolture.  The Air Parcel Express buses.
If you need to run them for positioning reasons, at least run both services express to Nambour stopping only at Beerwah, Australia Zoo and Landsborough

Best examples of AIR PARCEL EXPRESS if you ever seen one, at the most you'd get the occasional passenger or two for the whole trip on both services.

[somebody]

The LNP are well aware of the SCL need.  Throughout 2011 they were very vocal locally condemning the ALP for not proceeding with upgrades, particularly Beerburrum to Landsborough.  Now the the ball is in their court they are falling back on the money excuse and mostly remaining silent.  All part of the con to get elected ... lol

Agree, and I have and still hate Oppositions that do nothing but oppose and make half cocked, poorly thought out, popular usless statements when they really know the true answer. There is nothing preventing oppositions presenting fully costed ideas to the govt on how to solve an issue. I'm more likely to vote for a govt that is open to outside suggestions and implement when they are shown to work.

Ha ha.

Can you say Hewson?

[Fares_Fair]

Back to topic.

There is more to this situation than meets the eye.
It gets truly bizarre, with a bit of deliberate deception on the side.

May need to get the Ombudsman involved as well.

Despite twice asking the OIC for advice, once by phone and once in writing, at no time was I informed that I could appeal the decision to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. This whilst being told their preliminary decision not to provide the documents would be the final one before they deceived me into not proceeding any further with my request.

[Fares_Fair]

 

more to come on this ...

[Stillwater]

 

[somebody]

This is rather disgusting.

[Golliwog]

This is rather disgusting.

+1

[SurfRail]

This is an embarrassment.  If I wasn't so occupied with work this week, I would happily make some noise for you.

QCAT proceedings are intended to be lawyer-free (generally speaking), so should not prove too burdensome to work out if you want to drag them there - happy to give some pointers in an unofficial capacity.

[Fares_Fair]

Thank you SR,

I may well need your pertinent (unofficial) advice in the coming weeks.

The QCAT could not accept my documents for appeal because I did not get a final letter from the OIC.
The OIC are refusing to reopen the case, even given their 'apparent deception' or 'deliberate omission' over my right to appeal.
Because of this I cannot make an appeal to the QCAT.

I repeatedly asked what are my options and they gave me none, except to suggest making more RTI's to other agencies.
Given that this one has taken over a year ...

The Commissioner himself replied today, in it he 'notes my concern about the availability of appeal rights to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).'

He states "Other options that may be available to you are a subject upon which you may wish to seek your own legal advice."
He then says "On the basis of the above, the OIC will not correspond further with you in relation to this matter."

I do intend pursuing this further, their conduct was both unprofessional and reprehensible.
I am angered at their actions in this day and age.

Given the circumstances, he should be removed from office, and the staff involved either trained or disciplined if knowingly silent when I asked for options.

[#Metro]

Your other option ----> Courier Mail...

[Golliwog]

So the OIC is refusing to give you a final letter? Would going into their office do anything?

This really is a BS situation.

[Fares_Fair]

Because they deceived me into withdrawing my appeal, and withheld the advice I was seeking from them, I cannot appeal to the QCAT.
They must have known this would be the case.

I only discovered I could appeal to QCAT via a former train colleague who still receives my regular rail updates.

@Golli:
No, they consider the matter finalised and refuse to redress this wrong.
The final line in their letter to me seals it.
"On the basis of the above, the OIC will not correspond further with you in relation to this matter."

[Fares_Fair]

CLARIFICATION:

The commissioner states that the case is functus officio, and that he does not have the power under the Act to reopen it, even when new arguments or evidence is presented.
He then cites the case of MacMillan Bloedel Ltd v Minister of Finance (1985) 60 BCLR 145.<sup>2

2.</sup> Butterworth's Concise Australian Legal Dictionary (1997), 169.

[somebody]

Seems that asking an MP intervene is the best option looking forward.

[colinw]

Sounds like "Business as Usual" in Queensland then.

Don't you worry about that!

[Fares_Fair]

Agree.
I haven't come this far to give up now.

Good thing it isn't a national security issue ... instead merely advice QR has given to Government, but it's only administrative, talk about semantics.

The QCAT can only contest a point of law (according to the OIC), and since the OIC refuses to give a letter stating their reasons, the QCAT cannot act on this situation.

[ozbob]

... except to suggest making more RTI's to other agencies ...

Not a bad move at all. RTI to TMR, what advice have they provided to Ministers on  the upgrading of the Sunshine Coast Line?  No administrative bull there ...

[Fares_Fair]

You mean something like this ..

I would like to request any and all documents that the Department has freely available on the upgrading of the Sunshine Coast rail line, from September 2008 to present.
e.g.  Advice provided to Government Ministers, or any other departments involved in transport or infrastructure planning matters, on the Sunshine Coast Line.
This information to include any and all advice, reports, studies, audits etc. that are available.

[somebody]

You mean something like this ..

I would like to request any and all documents that the Department has freely available on the upgrading of the Sunshine Coast rail line, from September 2008 to present.
e.g.  Advice provided to Government Ministers, or any other departments involved in transport or infrastructure planning matters, on the Sunshine Coast Line.
This information to include any and all advice, reports, studies, audits etc. that are available.

See above.

[Fares_Fair]

Cheers, the example 2 posts above is the informal approach ... but editing will be noted for a hypothetical formal one.

[Stillwater]

People may care to examine the script of the Yes Minister TV series entitled 'The Skeleton in the Cupboard'.  Is the Sunshine Coast Line the state government's skelton in the cupboard?

[Fares_Fair]

Because they deceived me into withdrawing my appeal, and withheld the advice I was seeking from them, I cannot appeal to the QCAT.
They must have known this would be the case.

I only discovered I could appeal to QCAT via a former train colleague who still receives my regular rail updates.

@Golli:
No, they consider the matter finalised and refuse to redress this wrong.
The final line in their letter to me seals it.
"On the basis of the above, the OIC will not correspond further with you in relation to this matter."

I received a further communication on this matter today, including an option to discuss the points noted in the letter.
It confirms that had they issued a formal letter, that I could then could have made an appeal to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).
There appears to be semantics about what constitutes "advice to government."

My original email to QR asked for ...
I am seeking documents ... that gave or are giving advice to the government or government departments, at both State and/or Federal level ...

The final words used were ...
All documents giving advice to State and Federal Governments regarding infrastructure requirements
for the North Coast Line from Brisbane to Gympie North from September 2008 to March 2011.

Does QR provide advice to anyone on what it needs for the NCL?
The outcome of this RTI raises questions about why they tried to suppress this so-called 'administrative non-advice' for over a year.

More to come ..

[#Metro]

perhaps replace "advice" with "any correspondence"

[Fares_Fair]

perhaps replace "advice" with "any correspondence"

Hi and thank you TT,
The wording above is from a current RTI application that has taken over a year to get this far. 

[Stillwater]

A year to argue to semantics of what is 'advice to government'.   Really?  The reason for this must be known -- that is something that does not require an RFI request.  It seems hard to accept that no advice has 'gone to government'.  If that is the case, and is the issue that QR wants to hide, it is most disappointing.

[Fares_Fair]

Yes, incredible really.

They fought for over a year to stop documents of an 'administrative nature' from being released.

They do not provide (any) advice to government according to the OIC.
Tell that to the audit reports and studies that QR says are available for the Transport Minister's audit of the rail network.

They only became 'administrative in nature' after a second chance (made somewhere before/around 12 March 2012) to provide more information to the OIC.

It's pedantic semantics and it stinks of a cover up.

[Stillwater]

Agree

[Stillwater]

Perhaps next time, the request should be for:

copies of all documentation, emails, communications, written and otherwise, including:

email exchanges between QR employees and ministerial advisors
diary entries involving those same people
ministerial briefing notes
drafts of reports and funding submissions
safety and operational audits
details of maintenance carried out and the letting of tenders
copies of correspondence sent by the minister and/or the CEO of QR to outside persons
internal memos and correspondence (internal to QR)
email and written exchanges between the minister and the treasurer, and/or other ministers
email and written exchanges between the transport ministers advisers and staff in other ministers' offices
correspondence between the Queensland Government and Infrastructure Australia
correspondence between the Ministers for Transport and Infrastructure and Planning to the Federal Minister, Mr Albanese
email and written exchanges between the Transport Minister and the Infrastructure and Planning Minister
email and written exchanges between QR and QR National

..... relating to the Sunshine Coast Line to Gympie North.

Wording things that way avoids the debate about what is 'advice to government'.

[SurfRail]

Always pays to be specific as possible.

Despite the "rebranding" of the FOI legislation so that people now purportedly have a "right" to government information, there is still a cultural imperative that information should be kept in house, just as it always has been.