Labor’s FOI Betrayal: “A Retrograde Step” That Threatens Australian Democracy

Remember when Anthony Albanese declared he wasn’t “frightened of scrutiny and transparency” and promised to lead an “Open Government”? Those words ring hollow today as his administration introduces legislation that transparency advocates are calling “a retrograde step” and “an insult to democracy itself.”

The Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025 isn’t just policy reform—it’s a calculated dismantling of the public’s right to know. And it’s happening under a government that once championed the very transparency principles it now seeks to destroy.

What the Bill Really Does

• Allow agencies to reject FOI requests if processing them takes more than 40 hours.
• Ban anonymous requests, exposing whistleblowers and vulnerable citizens.
• Reintroduce fees abolished in 2010, a new “truth tax” on transparency.
• Expand Cabinet confidentiality exemptions, despite the Robodebt Royal Commission calling for the opposite.

Taken together, these measures shift FOI from being a tool of accountability to a mechanism for control.

Labor Rolls Back Its Own 2009 Transparency Reforms

“This Bill is a retrograde step on many levels,” warns the Centre for Public Integrity, and their alarm couldn’t be more justified.

Back in 2009, John Faulkner—then Labor’s Special Minister of State—implemented the biggest overhaul of FOI since the laws were introduced. Faulkner’s reforms made it easier for citizens to lodge FOI requests, removed application fees, and established an Information Commissioner to oversee disputes. Crucially, Faulkner created the “dominant purpose test” for Cabinet documents—meaning only documents primarily intended for Cabinet deliberation could be hidden from public view.

These changes were designed to make transparency a cornerstone of modern governance, challenging the public service to embrace greater openness.

Now, Labor is systematically reversing Faulkner’s work. The party that once fought to expand FOI rights is leading the charge to gut them.

What makes this betrayal even more brazen? Even the 2013 Allan Hawke review—which the government claims justifies these changes—explicitly recommended against restoring application fees. Labor is going further backward than even conservative reviews suggested.

40-Hour Threshold: How Labor Plans to Block FOI Requests

Attorney-General Michelle Rowland insists the changes are necessary to “reduce the significant and growing burden of FOI on agencies” and tackle “complex or voluminous requests.”

Don’t buy it. The 40-hour threshold—just a week’s work for one officer—sets the bar so low it could be weaponised to deny virtually any substantive request.

It’s not efficiency—it’s elimination.

“This Bill risks creating barriers to accessing information and scrutiny, rather than fixing the system,” warns Transparency International Australia.

Anonymous FOI Requests Banned: Whistleblowers Under Threat

By banning anonymous FOI requests, Labor is effectively telling whistleblowers, vulnerable citizens, and anyone fearing retaliation: your safety doesn’t matter.

Anonymous requests protect people seeking information about workplace safety violations, environmental breaches, or government misconduct. Without this protection, many legitimate inquiries will never be made.

“This will have a worrying impact on vulnerable individuals, particularly potential whistleblowers and others who fear retaliation for legitimate reasons.”
— Centre for Public Integrity

FOI Fees Return: Critics Slam Labor’s “Truth Tax”

In what critics are calling a “truth tax,” Labor is reintroducing fees that were abolished in 2010 precisely because they created barriers to transparency.

Back then, Information Commissioner John McMillan argued that charging people to access their own government’s information was fundamentally wrong. He fought to make FOI requests “a more routine and accepted part of the daily business of government agencies.”

Now, transparency risks becoming a privilege for those who can afford it. Journalists, civil society groups, and citizens will be forced to pay simply to hold government accountable.

Cabinet Document Exemptions Expanded Despite Robodebt Lessons

In perhaps the most shameless move of all, Labor is expanding Cabinet confidentiality exemptions at the exact moment the Robodebt Royal Commission called for them to be repealed.

Here’s the technical change that makes all the difference: Labor is shifting from Faulkner’s “dominant purpose test” to a “substantial purpose test.” Instead of protecting only documents primarily created for Cabinet deliberation, now any document that has substantial involvement with Cabinet matters can be hidden.

This means documents prepared because a matter might go to Cabinet, briefings about “Cabinet considerations,” consultants’ reports attached to Cabinet submissions—all will now be exempt from public scrutiny.

Instead of learning from a scandal that destroyed lives and cost taxpayers billions, this government is doubling down on secrecy.

“Instead of responding to the concerns about abuse of Cabinet confidentiality exemptions coming out of the Robodebt Royal Commission… this Bill expands that exemption,” argues the Centre for Public Integrity.

It’s a “classic Yes Minister move,” they add, “and it has no place in a modern democracy.”

What This Means for Australian Democracy

What we’re witnessing goes far beyond administrative reform. This is about the fundamental relationship between government and citizen—between power and accountability.

​There’s an unmistakable stench of political hubris here. This is a government poised for multiple terms in office thanks to opposition chaos. Instead of using its secure position to embrace greater transparency, Labor is seizing the opportunity to shield itself from accountability.

As former Commonwealth Ombudsman John Wood once observed, officials should be “happy to publicly defend any advice given to a minister.” If they’re not comfortable with public scrutiny of their work, perhaps they should reconsider that advice.

“The Albanese Labor Government… has indicated… that it has little concern or incentive to promote the transparency it talked up in Opposition,” concludes the Centre for Public Integrity.

This isn’t just about FOI laws—it’s about the kind of country we want to be. Do we want a democracy where citizens can hold their government accountable? Or one where transparency is rationed, whistleblowers are silenced, and secrecy is the default?

The Road We’re Going Down

Labor promised change. They promised transparency. They promised to be different. Instead, they are proving that power corrupts—and absolute power over information corrupts absolutely.

The question now is whether Parliament and the Australian people will let them get away with it. Because once these rights are lost, they are not easily won back.

Australians who believe in democracy should be demanding that this Bill be stopped. Because in a free society, the right to know isn’t optional—it’s everything.