When Government Hides

these measures reveal the government’s true colours: a deep instinct for control, dressed up in the language of public interest. by Anton issak.

“A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both.” - James Madison, 1822

Democracy breathes solely from the free and open transfer of information between the Government and the citizenry. Without this exchange, governments drift from representation to control, and citizens lose the ability to hold power to account.

Freedom of information laws (FOI) are an important part of this much needed check on Government power. 

FOI Legislation was first introduced in Australia by the Fraser Government in 1982 to ensure an informed public and a more open Government that was closer to the people.

It may surprise readers to learn that, after years of attacking the Morrison Government for “leading a cult of secrecy” and “arrogantly dismissing scrutiny” and vowing to operate transparently, the Albanese Government has been setting new records when it comes to denying FOI requests.

The first year of the Albanese Government was the first year when more FOI requests were refused than fully granted, which the Centre for Public Integrity has said undermined the transparency principles of the entire system. In the Senate, the Albanese Government complied with less than a third of orders to produce documents, compared to around half during the Morrison Government that Albanese so disparaged.

However, within the coming months, the Albanese Government will seek to convince Parliament to grant them sweeping new powers to conceal official documents, impose fees on FOI requests, and block applications made anonymously.

Labor seeks to roll back transparency standards that have stood for decades and put truth behind a paywall.

The proposed changes would also allow bureaucrats and public servants to issue outright refusals on requests from members of the public including academics, journalists and ordinary Australians on requests that would require greater than 40 hours of work to compile. These requests would typically take a decently sized team a handful of hours to prepare.

The government also seeks to change wording in the FOI legislation to further empower their ability to reject requests. Currently, documents prepared with the “dominant purpose” of going before cabinet are exempt from disclosure. The proposed shift to a “substantive purpose” test would broaden this exemption, enabling the government to shield far more material from scrutiny.

In effect, these changes would grant the Government the ability to reject FOI applications for any document discussed during Cabinet meetings as well as related briefings, background papers, departmental advice, sealing much of the policy discourse behind closed doors.

When the Government goes out of its way to shield information from the Australian people, they undermine public confidence in the Country’s institutions, creating a more hostile, untrusting political and social landscape. There is a sacred trust that exists between citizens and their government that has in recent years come under increasing stress, and it will completely extinguish in darkness.

In a bid to rationalise these changes with doublespeak, the Government insists that limiting FOI access will in fact enhance transparency. The Prime Minister and Attorney General Michelle Rowland claim the system is being exploited by foreign agents, and malicious actors, and that the only way to ensure an efficient, open Government is to curb this access - a move others would simply call gaslighting.

When the Government and the Bureaucracy know each and every decision it makes has the potential to be scrutinised to the fullest extent by the public, they are compelled to act with greater honesty, accountability, and respect for the people they serve.

This is not the first piece of legislation that exposes the Albanese Government’s systematic allergy to transparency. Only last year, in a chilling attempt to crush free and open discourse online, Labor introduced the so-called ‘Misinformation Bill’ curbing free speech and stifling democratic debate under the guise of championing truth. 

Taken together, these measures reveal the government’s true colours: a deep instinct for control, dressed up in the language of public interest.

While no system is perfect, and there is room for debate on reforms relating to FOI legislation, all changes must unequivocally have no impact on the public's ability to freely and openly lodge FOI requests and receive responses in a timely manner. This must be at the forefront of all discussions relating to systematic reform.

As James Madison warned, a government without the means for its people to acquire information is destined for farce or tragedy. That warning resonates now more than ever: if we allow FOI to be hollowed out, we accept a politics where truth is obscured, trust is eroded, and citizens are left watching power operate in the shadows.

Anton Issak is an intern at the Menzies Research Centre.