Personal Information and Privacy

David Shoebridge

I move:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) on 2 July 2026, the Senate agreed to order for the production of documents no. 559, relating to relating to documents held by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), with a compliance date of no later than 28 July 2026,

(ii) on 30 July 2026, the Minister representing the Attorney-General provided a response from the Attorney-General and on 17 August 2026, the Senate agreed to an additional order:

(A) rejecting the public interest immunity claims raised by the Attorney-General in the response, and

(B) requiring the Minister representing the Attorney-General to produce the documents set out in paragraphs (a) and (e) of the original order, subject only to the redaction of information that may be reasonably capable of causing harm to an individual, by 5 pm on 18 August 2026;

(iii) on 25 August 2026, the Minister representing the Attorney-General provided an additional letter from the Attorney-General:

(A) maintaining the public interest immunity claims raised in the 30 July 2026 letter, and

(B) withholding redacted versions of the documents ordered in the additional order, also on the grounds of legal professional privilege and that disclosure of the documents would unfairly influence the conduct of legal proceedings, and again citing the practice of successive Australian Governments not to disclose privileged legal advice;

(iv) the order has still not been complied with,

(b) has already rejected the public interest immunity claims raised by the Attorney-General in relation to the documents ordered in the original order, noting that the Attorney-General has raised the same public interest immunity claims in respect of the documents ordered in the additional order;

(c) again rejects the public interest immunity claims raised by the Attorney General in the 25 August 2026 letter, noting that:

(i) as outlined in Odgers' Australian Senate Practice, the Senate has rejected government claims that there is a long-standing practice of not disclosing privileged legal advice and this claim is undermined by the fact that governments disclose legal advice when they choose to do so, particularly where the advice supports a government position,

(ii) despite the Senate rejecting the public interest immunity claims raised by the Attorney-General in the 30 July 2026 letter, the

Attorney-General's additional letter of 25 August 2026 reiterates those claims, and

(iii) the additional letter from the Attorney-General does not acknowledge the need to balance any prejudice to legal proceedings against the public interest of having these documents disclosed;

(d) requires the Minister representing the Attorney-General to comply with the additional order agreed to by the Senate on 17 August 2026, by 11 am on

17 September 2026.

Sue Lines

The question is that general business notice of motion No. 750 standing in the name of Senator Shoebridge be agreed to.