Dept of Communities & Justice Reveals its Internal Policy titled “Tale of a Fixated Applicant” Created by an Ex-NSW Top Cop;
A Policy Designed to Denigrate the Public, Breach the Public’s Privacy,
Provide a Roadmap of Restraint and Punishment to Over 400 Hundred Right to Information & Privacy Officers Across NSW, 05.10.2022
She followed a trail of breadcrumbs to a Google Site (since deactivated (https://sites.google.com/view/information-privacy-nsw-home), which recorded the Minutes of Meetings of the NSW Right to Information & Privacy Practitioners Network, since acronymed NIPPN.
Practitioners.
Infering they care about the wellbeing of the public they serve.
That is a deception. Make no mistake, the purpose of this group is to undermine the public’s rights, where members educate each other, where specialist speakers show public servants how to beat the legislation they are in place to uphold and respect.
They operate by Chatham House Rules, a prep-school premise where adult prefects operate under a code of silence and secrecy, sharing the public’s personal information in breach of the legislation and pledging to one another they won’t tell a soul; not even managers.
It’s a shame they forgot to apply that secrecy to the internet…………. Such arrogance, to think nobody would notice the documented activities of NIPPN right out in the open; linked to the state’s regulator the Office of the NSW Information & Privacy Commission.
Cue Telina Webb of NSW Freedom of Information, provider of a relatively new free community service launched in October 2021 during the NSW Information & Privacy Commissioner’s (IPC) Right to Know Week 2021. The IPC advertises it champions the rights of the public of NSW; the right to know what the government is doing; the right to hold public servants to account; the right to privacy.
But none of it is real.
Webb saw the NIPPN Minutes of the Meeting of 27th March 2019 recorded Dept of Communities & Justice (Justice NSW) had made a presentation about ‘Difficult Complainants.’ And so Webb lodged an Access Application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA), for an unredacted copy of the document.
The Minutes recorded the presentation had been made at NSW Parliament House. That’s a public place. There was no mention the meeting had been closed to the public.
On 05th October 2022 Justice NSW issued its Notice of Decision, providing a partial document with heavy redactions.
But there was no disputing those parts of the document which had been released. Justice NSW had determined to create an internal policy which labelled the most fundamental behaviours as conduct which should not be tolerated and instead be responded to harshly:
• Highlighting text in a document in bold was offensive• Boldig text in a document was offensive• Underlining text in a document was offensive• Copying correspondence to third parties was offensive• Seeking meetings with public servants was offensive• Setting timeframes for responses was offensive The document itself contained a number of bold font headings (not offensive when used by the Department). Some of the response strategies included:• Restricting access to email services• Restricting access to telephone calls• Restricting correspondence to regular mail delivery Lights at the end of the tunnel included:• Colluding with other agencies (which must be taken to breach the public’s privacy)• Involving NSW Police• Seeking costs in NCAT proceedings (which are not legislated in either GIPA or PPIP)• Seeking Section 110 Orders of Restraint (which can be easily engineered) Again, the document is titled “Tale of a Fixated Applicant.” Is it about a member of the public. It is about a person. And the creator of this document was pointing out this person to the whole population of right to information and privacy officers in the state of NSW. So as a gesture of fairness, transparency, and accountability, just who is this individual responsible for such behaviours? It is ex-NSW Police Superintendent Jodie Cobbin, currently occupying the coveted position of Director / Business Unit Manager, Dept of Communities & Justice Open Government Information & Privacy Unit (OGIPU) (yes that’s a mouthful). Cobbin has been in the role since 2016. But she’s forgotten she is now just a clerk, a paper-pusher. She is NOT a police officer now. She does NOT have unfettered powers to access and share the public’s personal information. Nor does she have any authority to act outside of her mandate. This presentation, Cobbin’s presentation, is her personal recommendation to act outside of the legislation, in effect break the law. And she is setting the example on how she does it and how can behave in the same way.
One can only imagine the trail of collateral damage she left behind her in her former life as one of the Girls in Blue. The Notice of Decision speaks for itself. Whoever made the Decision, a Jordan Creyson who doesn't actually exist, refers to Webb's website. Creyson states the document might be published and so uses that as a reason to withhold full access to it. But that's not in the list of Public Interest Considerations Against Disclosure. Oh well. If you're going to create a unapproved phoney policy to use against the public, might as well also create a phoney public interest against disclosure. Creyson also states release of the presentation could prejudice the exercise of the agency's functions. Pretty sure victims of this 'policy' get the point of it. Creyson also states release of the presentation could place public servants in danger. The only likely danger is that of Cobbin being called to account for breaching the public's privacy. That is actually an offence. Not a good look for an ex-NSW Police Superintendent covering up offences against the public's beneficial legislation.
“I’m taking this GIPA decision to the IPC. I’m expecting the IPC to agree with the OGIPU, it generally does agree with its subordinate agencies. If that’s the case I’ll then take it to NCAT. The public has the right to know the remainder of the document. The GIPA Act states its purpose is to ensure government transparency, accountability, and responsible democratic government. Let’s test that statement, let’s test the law, in this instance the public’s beneficial legislation the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, GIPA,” stated Webb. "This Decision does nothing to ensure transparency, accountability, or responsible democratic government. How embarrassing!"
The Notice of Decision is available here. The heavily redacted document is available here.
Contact: Jodie Cobbin, jodie.cobbin@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Practitioners.
Infering they care about the wellbeing of the public they serve.
That is a deception. Make no mistake, the purpose of this group is to undermine the public’s rights, where members educate each other, where specialist speakers show public servants how to beat the legislation they are in place to uphold and respect.
They operate by Chatham House Rules, a prep-school premise where adult prefects operate under a code of silence and secrecy, sharing the public’s personal information in breach of the legislation and pledging to one another they won’t tell a soul; not even managers.
It’s a shame they forgot to apply that secrecy to the internet…………. Such arrogance, to think nobody would notice the documented activities of NIPPN right out in the open; linked to the state’s regulator the Office of the NSW Information & Privacy Commission.
Cue Telina Webb of NSW Freedom of Information, provider of a relatively new free community service launched in October 2021 during the NSW Information & Privacy Commissioner’s (IPC) Right to Know Week 2021. The IPC advertises it champions the rights of the public of NSW; the right to know what the government is doing; the right to hold public servants to account; the right to privacy.
But none of it is real.
Webb saw the NIPPN Minutes of the Meeting of 27th March 2019 recorded Dept of Communities & Justice (Justice NSW) had made a presentation about ‘Difficult Complainants.’ And so Webb lodged an Access Application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA), for an unredacted copy of the document.
The Minutes recorded the presentation had been made at NSW Parliament House. That’s a public place. There was no mention the meeting had been closed to the public.
On 05th October 2022 Justice NSW issued its Notice of Decision, providing a partial document with heavy redactions.
But there was no disputing those parts of the document which had been released. Justice NSW had determined to create an internal policy which labelled the most fundamental behaviours as conduct which should not be tolerated and instead be responded to harshly:
• Highlighting text in a document in bold was offensive• Boldig text in a document was offensive• Underlining text in a document was offensive• Copying correspondence to third parties was offensive• Seeking meetings with public servants was offensive• Setting timeframes for responses was offensive The document itself contained a number of bold font headings (not offensive when used by the Department). Some of the response strategies included:• Restricting access to email services• Restricting access to telephone calls• Restricting correspondence to regular mail delivery Lights at the end of the tunnel included:• Colluding with other agencies (which must be taken to breach the public’s privacy)• Involving NSW Police• Seeking costs in NCAT proceedings (which are not legislated in either GIPA or PPIP)• Seeking Section 110 Orders of Restraint (which can be easily engineered) Again, the document is titled “Tale of a Fixated Applicant.” Is it about a member of the public. It is about a person. And the creator of this document was pointing out this person to the whole population of right to information and privacy officers in the state of NSW. So as a gesture of fairness, transparency, and accountability, just who is this individual responsible for such behaviours? It is ex-NSW Police Superintendent Jodie Cobbin, currently occupying the coveted position of Director / Business Unit Manager, Dept of Communities & Justice Open Government Information & Privacy Unit (OGIPU) (yes that’s a mouthful). Cobbin has been in the role since 2016. But she’s forgotten she is now just a clerk, a paper-pusher. She is NOT a police officer now. She does NOT have unfettered powers to access and share the public’s personal information. Nor does she have any authority to act outside of her mandate. This presentation, Cobbin’s presentation, is her personal recommendation to act outside of the legislation, in effect break the law. And she is setting the example on how she does it and how can behave in the same way.
One can only imagine the trail of collateral damage she left behind her in her former life as one of the Girls in Blue. The Notice of Decision speaks for itself. Whoever made the Decision, a Jordan Creyson who doesn't actually exist, refers to Webb's website. Creyson states the document might be published and so uses that as a reason to withhold full access to it. But that's not in the list of Public Interest Considerations Against Disclosure. Oh well. If you're going to create a unapproved phoney policy to use against the public, might as well also create a phoney public interest against disclosure. Creyson also states release of the presentation could prejudice the exercise of the agency's functions. Pretty sure victims of this 'policy' get the point of it. Creyson also states release of the presentation could place public servants in danger. The only likely danger is that of Cobbin being called to account for breaching the public's privacy. That is actually an offence. Not a good look for an ex-NSW Police Superintendent covering up offences against the public's beneficial legislation.
“I’m taking this GIPA decision to the IPC. I’m expecting the IPC to agree with the OGIPU, it generally does agree with its subordinate agencies. If that’s the case I’ll then take it to NCAT. The public has the right to know the remainder of the document. The GIPA Act states its purpose is to ensure government transparency, accountability, and responsible democratic government. Let’s test that statement, let’s test the law, in this instance the public’s beneficial legislation the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, GIPA,” stated Webb. "This Decision does nothing to ensure transparency, accountability, or responsible democratic government. How embarrassing!"
The Notice of Decision is available here. The heavily redacted document is available here.
Contact: Jodie Cobbin, jodie.cobbin@dcj.nsw.gov.au