Redacted FOI request raises questions on Australian aid's transparency

CANBERRA — In May, Alex Hawke, the new minister for international development and the Pacific, got an incoming brief. Now, a freedom of information request on the brief has produced a heavily redacted document, raising questions on whether transparency is at the top of the agenda for the Australian aid program. “We recognise that advice to Ministers is sensitive,” a spokesperson for the Australian Council for International Development told Devex. “But when requests such as this are so heavily redacted, coupled with a lack of progress on transparency and enriching public debate and community engagement, there is an inevitable drop in confidence in what the government is trying to achieve.” “The government is now trying to avoid accountability for the adverse impacts of these cuts by redacting information from documents released under freedom of information legislation.” --— Pat Conroy, shadow minister for international development and the Pacific Released by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on Sept. 3, the document provides briefings for foreign minister Marise Payne, trade minister Simon Birmingham, and Hawke, with briefings specific to Hawke contained in the last 39 pages. Of these, 19 pages have been entirely redacted, 18 pages partially redacted, and only two kept intact. Information has been redacted under sections of the FOI Act that enable government agencies to withhold information that provides an opinion, advice or recommendations to a minister or the government, and is deemed to have an “adverse effect” on the operations of an agency or could affect national security, defense, or international relations. The partially redacted table of contents shows that the minister was provided with information on strategic context, international development, development snapshots, the Indo-Pacific, global cooperation, and early considerations for directions of the aid program. Information that was deemed suitable for public release includes a summary of what DFAT see as the greatest risks in the Indo-Pacific reason — including high levels of extreme poverty, increased illiberalism, democratic backsliding, closing space for civil society, disenfranchised youth, and violence against women and girls. The need to leverage private financing to meet the SDGs was additionally discussed, as well as the risks of humanitarian spending not growing in line with global need, and the impact of technological change to the delivery of aid. But the information released can largely be found on the public record — including information collated from aid budget summaries, the Foreign Policy White Paper, Performance of Australian Aid report, and other existing documents on the framework and objectives of the aid program. What does DFAT say about transparency? In a speech delivered to public servants in Canberra on Sept. 24, Australian Information and Privacy Commissioner Angelene Falk explained the important role FOI played in improving transparency and engagement with the public. “In Australia, we are focusing on promoting greater recognition that information gathered by government is a national resource and subject to appropriate safeguards should generally be available to the public,” she said. “From the OAIC’s perspective, making information available is essential to building trust in the community, and you play a vital part in achieving that goal.” DFAT themselves have discussed the importance of improving transparency in a number of recent speeches. “Transparency is vital, if at times painful,” DFAT Secretary Frances Adamson told the Australasian Aid Conference in February. “This is an essential part of building trusting long-term relations with our international partners, and of getting our development partnerships right.” Previous ministers for international development and the Pacific — including Concetta Fierravanti-Wells and Anne Ruston — have also told Devex of the need to educate the Australian public on what the aid program does. “I do think that there is a greater role for us to communicate the huge benefits to Australia of the work that we do in the Pacific and equally making sure that Australians understand that their money … is delivering good and strong benefits for the communities we are working with,” Ruston told Devex in February. DFAT declined to provide any comment to Devex on the record to further explain the decision to withhold information, saying it would not be appropriate to comment on the substance of exempt material. It additionally explained that the FOI Act provided a framework material to be exempt from release, where appropriate exemptions apply. This may suggest an almost automated approach to FOI within DFAT — where exemptions can apply, they will be applied. Response to the released document ACFID explained to Devex that the redacted document continued to show a lack of progress on recommendations from successive reviews saying the government needed to increase efforts on transparency and communication of the aid program. “In 2018, the OECD recommended that DFAT should invest in communication and development education,” the ACFID spokesperson said. “Only in April this year, the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs inquiry into aid effectiveness recommended that more funding should be dedicated to raising awareness of the benefits of the program.” For the Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific Pat Conroy, the redactions signaled a government trying to hide the impact of aid budget cuts. Since 2013, $11.8 billion Australian dollars [$7.9 billion] has been reduced from Australia’s official development assistance. “The government is now trying to avoid accountability for the adverse impacts of these cuts by redacting information from documents released under freedom of information legislation,” he told Devex. “Labor supports transparency and accountability for Australia’s international development programs. This is important not only to ensure our aid programs achieve value for money and effective outcomes in tackling poverty and boosting economic and social development. It is also an important way of building public understanding and support for Australian development assistance.” And despite DFAT saying communication and transparency was a priority, ACFID said the budget cuts in addition to being asked to find further operational savings meant that transparency would slip down the priority list. “Unlike other nations, there is no strategic communications strategy to foster public awareness and support for the government’s efforts. The government has been unable to effectively tell the story of Australia’s successful development program and what it means for beneficiaries and Australia’s international relationships.” The Minister for International Development and the Pacific, Alex Hawke, was contacted in relation to this story and did not provide comment by the deadline.