Vertical Accountability
#27Key Findings
Australia falls into the lower ranks (rank 27) in the area of vertical accountability.
Elections are fundamentally competitive. The political arena is dominated by two major parties/coalitions, Labor and the Liberal-National coalition, which contend on a relatively balanced playing field.
Barriers to effective political competition are low, but political financing practices impose formal and informal disadvantages on minor parties. Political finance disclosure laws are stringent at the federal level. Lower turnout rates in regions with large Indigenous populations are a concern.
A preferential rank-order voting system allows voters to express complex preferences. Party membership levels are low and declining. Party competitiveness hinders cross-party cooperation, but governing parties typically hold majorities.
Well-respected freedom of information (FOI) rules are in place, but the regulations contain significant loopholes. FOI requests are increasingly being rejected, diminishing public confidence in the system.
Elections are fundamentally competitive. The political arena is dominated by two major parties/coalitions, Labor and the Liberal-National coalition, which contend on a relatively balanced playing field.
Barriers to effective political competition are low, but political financing practices impose formal and informal disadvantages on minor parties. Political finance disclosure laws are stringent at the federal level. Lower turnout rates in regions with large Indigenous populations are a concern.
A preferential rank-order voting system allows voters to express complex preferences. Party membership levels are low and declining. Party competitiveness hinders cross-party cooperation, but governing parties typically hold majorities.
Well-respected freedom of information (FOI) rules are in place, but the regulations contain significant loopholes. FOI requests are increasingly being rejected, diminishing public confidence in the system.
Graph View
Graph View
To what extent is political competition among candidates and political parties free and fair?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, to effective political competition.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to effective political competition.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to effective political competition.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to effective political competition.
Elections in Australia are fundamentally competitive. The major parties, Labor and the Liberal-Nationals, contend on a relatively balanced playing field. This should be seen as the outcome of long-term processes of bargaining, anticipation and risk mitigation by the major parties.
While barriers to effective political competition are low, some do exist. A significant example is political financing, where minor parties face disadvantages both formally and informally. The primary instrument of electoral regulation, the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, has undergone several amendments, the latest in 2019. This act provides registered political parties with public funding at each election (see Australian Electoral Commission 2023). Parties and candidates who secure 4% of first-preference votes in an electorate are eligible for a fixed-sum payment, set at AUD10,656 in the 2022 federal election. Parties and candidates can also receive substantial top-up payments beyond that based on the number of votes they receive. The rate is set by legislation (Commonwealth Electoral Act, Section 321) and indexed every six months. For the 2022 federal election, this rate was AUD2.914 per eligible vote.
Overall, competitive conditions are more challenging for minor parties and independent candidates, who face higher formal and informal hurdles in areas like political financing and media exposure compared to major parties and their candidates. The increase in the number of independents at the 2019 federal election indicates that long-standing assumptions about party competition and its regulation in Australia are evolving. Reforms reflecting the growing significance of these minor players are actively debated. Currently, the Restoring Trust Bill, under discussion in the federal parliament, proposes substantial reforms to the electoral landscape, particularly regarding political financing. Proposed changes include lowering the disclosure threshold (the donation amount that must be publicly declared), introducing real-time donation disclosures, banning donations from government contractors, and limiting taxpayer-funded government advertising before elections (Orr 2023). According to Kate Chaney, Independent Member for Curtin, these reforms will “improve transparency, reduce financial influence and level the playing field in Australia’s elections” (Chaney 2023).
In addition to the balance of competition between major and minor parties, other challenges include transparency issues (such as high national-level disclosure thresholds) and difficulties in combating disinformation during election campaigns (Zhang and Johnson 2023). The political finance bill under consideration in the federal parliament aims to address these and other outstanding issues.
While the ongoing debate has focused on national conditions, the states have been relatively innovative. Political finance disclosure laws are more stringent at the federal level than in any subnational jurisdiction. South Australia has pioneered truth in political advertising laws to tackle disinformation in election campaigns.
Citations:
Australian Electoral Commission. 2023. “2022 Federal Election: Election Funding Payments Finalised.” https://www.aec.gov.au/media/2022/12-21.htm#:~:text=Parties%20and%20candidates%20who%20received,and%20is%20an%20indexed%20figure
Chaney, K. 2023. “Restoring Trust Bill.” https://www.katechaney.com.au/rtb
Orr, G. 2023. “Proposed Spending and Donations Caps May at Last Bring Genuine Reform to National Election Rules.” The Conversation June 20. https://theconversation.com/proposed-spending-and-donations-caps-may-at-last-bring-genuine-reform-to-national-election-rules-208031
Zhang, A. and Jonson, B. 2023. “Spotting Misinformation and Disinformation in Australia’s Voice to Parliament Referendum.” The Strategist September 28. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/spotting-misinformation-and-disinformation-in-australias-voice-to-parliament-referendum/
While barriers to effective political competition are low, some do exist. A significant example is political financing, where minor parties face disadvantages both formally and informally. The primary instrument of electoral regulation, the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, has undergone several amendments, the latest in 2019. This act provides registered political parties with public funding at each election (see Australian Electoral Commission 2023). Parties and candidates who secure 4% of first-preference votes in an electorate are eligible for a fixed-sum payment, set at AUD10,656 in the 2022 federal election. Parties and candidates can also receive substantial top-up payments beyond that based on the number of votes they receive. The rate is set by legislation (Commonwealth Electoral Act, Section 321) and indexed every six months. For the 2022 federal election, this rate was AUD2.914 per eligible vote.
Overall, competitive conditions are more challenging for minor parties and independent candidates, who face higher formal and informal hurdles in areas like political financing and media exposure compared to major parties and their candidates. The increase in the number of independents at the 2019 federal election indicates that long-standing assumptions about party competition and its regulation in Australia are evolving. Reforms reflecting the growing significance of these minor players are actively debated. Currently, the Restoring Trust Bill, under discussion in the federal parliament, proposes substantial reforms to the electoral landscape, particularly regarding political financing. Proposed changes include lowering the disclosure threshold (the donation amount that must be publicly declared), introducing real-time donation disclosures, banning donations from government contractors, and limiting taxpayer-funded government advertising before elections (Orr 2023). According to Kate Chaney, Independent Member for Curtin, these reforms will “improve transparency, reduce financial influence and level the playing field in Australia’s elections” (Chaney 2023).
In addition to the balance of competition between major and minor parties, other challenges include transparency issues (such as high national-level disclosure thresholds) and difficulties in combating disinformation during election campaigns (Zhang and Johnson 2023). The political finance bill under consideration in the federal parliament aims to address these and other outstanding issues.
While the ongoing debate has focused on national conditions, the states have been relatively innovative. Political finance disclosure laws are more stringent at the federal level than in any subnational jurisdiction. South Australia has pioneered truth in political advertising laws to tackle disinformation in election campaigns.
Citations:
Australian Electoral Commission. 2023. “2022 Federal Election: Election Funding Payments Finalised.” https://www.aec.gov.au/media/2022/12-21.htm#:~:text=Parties%20and%20candidates%20who%20received,and%20is%20an%20indexed%20figure
Chaney, K. 2023. “Restoring Trust Bill.” https://www.katechaney.com.au/rtb
Orr, G. 2023. “Proposed Spending and Donations Caps May at Last Bring Genuine Reform to National Election Rules.” The Conversation June 20. https://theconversation.com/proposed-spending-and-donations-caps-may-at-last-bring-genuine-reform-to-national-election-rules-208031
Zhang, A. and Jonson, B. 2023. “Spotting Misinformation and Disinformation in Australia’s Voice to Parliament Referendum.” The Strategist September 28. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/spotting-misinformation-and-disinformation-in-australias-voice-to-parliament-referendum/
To what extent can all citizens, both in legal terms (de jure) and in practice (de facto), exercise their right to vote?
10
9
9
There are no significant barriers, by law or in practice, that hinder citizens or specific groups in society from exercising their right to vote.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to voting.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to voting.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles that substantially hinder voting.
However, there is noteworthy variation in turnout across the country. Lower turnout rates in regional areas with large Indigenous populations are of particular concern (Central Land Council 2022). Contributing factors to this disparity include lower information penetration, lower levels of educational literacy, and inadequate interpreter and translation services in these regions. Post-election analyses also show higher rates of informal voting – when a vote is submitted but not counted due to errors in ballot completion – in Indigenous communities compared to other areas.
The homeless population also exhibits low levels of electoral participation (Coram et al. 2019). This demographic faces difficulties enrolling to vote and maintaining their enrollment due to frequent changes in accommodation.
Certain minority communities encounter barriers to participation, often related to English language proficiency. For instance, while the rate of informal voting was around 3% nationwide in the 2022 federal election, it was significantly higher in multicultural communities. In the electorate of Fowler in western Sydney, which has large Vietnamese and Chinese populations, the informal vote rate exceeded 10% (Jakubowicz 2023). Additionally, non-citizen permanent residents are not eligible to vote.
Individuals with cognitive disabilities represent another marginalized group. Thousands of Australians have been removed from the electoral roll under the “soundness of mind” clause (Ramcharan et al. 2023). There has been little systematic effort by government agencies to increase the inclusion of people with cognitive disabilities, and there is no requirement for political parties and candidates to provide campaign information in cognitively accessible ways.
Prisoners serving sentences of less than three years, those on early release, or those on parole are entitled to vote via postal vote or prison mobile polling teams, provided they satisfy other voting requirements (Australian Electoral Commission 2023).
Citations:
Jakubowicz, A. 2023. “Will multicultural Australians support the Voice? The success of the referendum may hinge on it.” The Conversation February 9. https://theconversation.com/will-multicultural-australians-support-the-voice-the-success-of-the-referendum-may-hinge-on-it-199304
Ramcharan, P., McVilly, K., Despott, N., and Bloomfield, C. 2023. “Australia Must Include People with Cognitive Disability in Politics.” Pursuit September 20. https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/australia-must-include-people-with-cognitive-disability-in-politics
Australian Electoral Commission. 2007. “Fact Sheet: Prisoner Voting.” Australian Electoral Commission October.
https://aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Fact_Sheets/fact_sheets/prisoner-voting.pdf
Central Land Council. 2022. “Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry into the 2022 Federal Election.” Central Land Council. https://www.clc.org.au/files/SUB-221024-CLC-submission-to-JSCEM-Inquiry-into-2022-Federal-Election-FINAL.pdf
Coram, V., Louth, J., Hill, L., Tually, S., and Goodwin-Smith, I. 2019. An Exploration of Homelessness and Electoral Participation. University of South Australia and The University of Adelaide. https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/research/files/an-exploration-of-homelessness-and-electoral-participation.pdf
The homeless population also exhibits low levels of electoral participation (Coram et al. 2019). This demographic faces difficulties enrolling to vote and maintaining their enrollment due to frequent changes in accommodation.
Certain minority communities encounter barriers to participation, often related to English language proficiency. For instance, while the rate of informal voting was around 3% nationwide in the 2022 federal election, it was significantly higher in multicultural communities. In the electorate of Fowler in western Sydney, which has large Vietnamese and Chinese populations, the informal vote rate exceeded 10% (Jakubowicz 2023). Additionally, non-citizen permanent residents are not eligible to vote.
Individuals with cognitive disabilities represent another marginalized group. Thousands of Australians have been removed from the electoral roll under the “soundness of mind” clause (Ramcharan et al. 2023). There has been little systematic effort by government agencies to increase the inclusion of people with cognitive disabilities, and there is no requirement for political parties and candidates to provide campaign information in cognitively accessible ways.
Prisoners serving sentences of less than three years, those on early release, or those on parole are entitled to vote via postal vote or prison mobile polling teams, provided they satisfy other voting requirements (Australian Electoral Commission 2023).
Citations:
Jakubowicz, A. 2023. “Will multicultural Australians support the Voice? The success of the referendum may hinge on it.” The Conversation February 9. https://theconversation.com/will-multicultural-australians-support-the-voice-the-success-of-the-referendum-may-hinge-on-it-199304
Ramcharan, P., McVilly, K., Despott, N., and Bloomfield, C. 2023. “Australia Must Include People with Cognitive Disability in Politics.” Pursuit September 20. https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/australia-must-include-people-with-cognitive-disability-in-politics
Australian Electoral Commission. 2007. “Fact Sheet: Prisoner Voting.” Australian Electoral Commission October.
https://aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Fact_Sheets/fact_sheets/prisoner-voting.pdf
Central Land Council. 2022. “Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry into the 2022 Federal Election.” Central Land Council. https://www.clc.org.au/files/SUB-221024-CLC-submission-to-JSCEM-Inquiry-into-2022-Federal-Election-FINAL.pdf
Coram, V., Louth, J., Hill, L., Tually, S., and Goodwin-Smith, I. 2019. An Exploration of Homelessness and Electoral Participation. University of South Australia and The University of Adelaide. https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/research/files/an-exploration-of-homelessness-and-electoral-participation.pdf
Graph View
To what extent do parties articulate and aggregate all societal interests?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, to achieving effective societal integration.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose no significant barriers to achieving effective societal integration.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose some significant barriers to achieving effective societal integration.
2
1
1
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose various significant barriers to achieving effective societal integration.
The wide range of views presented by the parties in the Australian party system facilitates effective social integration, supported by preferential voting. However, the low and declining membership of parties indicates weakening societal penetration and relevance.
The Australian party system comprises two major parties/coalitions, Labor and the Liberal-National coalition, alongside several minor parties (with the Greens being the largest) and an increasing number of independent MPs and Senators. At the national level, the Liberal-National coalition, which had governed continuously since 2013, was defeated in the 2022 federal election, resulting in a Labor majority. Various competitive arrangements exist at the state level, such as in Victoria and Queensland, where Labor has been dominant for extended periods.
Labor is traditionally associated with left-wing politics, combining economic priorities with social and cultural policies. The Liberal-National coalition advocates conservative policies across economic, social, and cultural matters. Although the Liberals and Nationals are independent parties, they do not compete against each other in elections and generally operate as a cohesive coalition. The National party primarily draws support from regional and rural voters, making Australia unique internationally for having a significant agrarian party. Smaller parties and independents cater to niche electoral markets, including environmentalism, nativism, and integrity.
A wide range of ideological positions and manifestos are presented to voters at election time. For example, significant differences between the major parties were apparent in the 2022 federal election regarding aged care policy, corruption and the federal integrity commission, childcare policy, climate change policy, housing policy, the Voice and Indigenous recognition, and health policy (Guardian staff 2022).
The preferential voting system used in Australian elections allows voters to rank-order parties/candidates, enabling them to express complex preferences. Left-leaning supporters often give their first preference vote to Labor or the Greens and their second preference to the other left-leaning party. Right-leaning voters may distribute their preferences between the Liberal-National Coalition and right-leaning minor parties like One Nation. To capitalize on preferential voting, parties issue ‘how to vote’ cards to guide their supporters on allocating preferences.
While natural affinities exist between parties on the same side of the ideological spectrum, conflicts can arise among these ‘ideological friends.’ For example, relations between Labor and the Greens have been strained over their disagreement on addressing the housing affordability crisis (Speers 2023). Labor proposed a housing fund to build 30,000 social and affordable homes over three years, while the Greens called for more urgent action, including a rent freeze. Similar tensions have occurred on the right. During the 2022 federal election, the Liberal-National Coalition placed One Nation below Jacquie Lambie on its how-to-vote card for the Tasmanian senate elections. One Nation responded by directing its supporters to preference Labor ahead of the Liberal-National Coalition in five seats (Karp and Hinchliffe 2022).
Although parties present a wide range of positions, there has been some weakening of the connection between these positions and the demands and preferences of ordinary citizens. One reason may be the low and declining levels of party membership across the system (Oliver 2014), as party members traditionally played a key role in conveying grassroots views to party elites. The tenor of political discourse, in parliament and the media, may also have accelerated disillusionment and disengagement.
Citations:
Guardian staff. 2022. “Who should I vote for? Guide to seven key policies in the 2022 Australian federal election where Labor and Coalition differ.” The Guardian, May 20. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/20/australia-federal-election-2022-labor-liberal-coalition-australian-policy-guide-who-should-can-i-vote-for-aged-care-icac-childcare-climate-change
Karp, P., and Hinchliffe, J. 2023. “One Nation Directs Preferences to Labor in Five Seats Targeting Left-leaning Liberals.” The Guardian April 28. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/apr/28/one-nation-directs-preferences-to-labor-in-five-seats-targeting-left-leaning-liberals
Speers, D. 2023. “Labor and the Greens aren’t strangers to conflict. But in this week’s housing stand-off, something snapped.” ABC News June 22. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-22/greens-playing-politics-housing-bill-double-dissolution/102505478
Oliver, A. 2014. Are Australians Disenchanted with Democracy? Papers on Parliament No. 62. https://www.aph.gov.au/senate/~/~/link.aspx?_id=01FD7901F7E14E9A86A44F9C217BFEC6&_z=z
The Australian party system comprises two major parties/coalitions, Labor and the Liberal-National coalition, alongside several minor parties (with the Greens being the largest) and an increasing number of independent MPs and Senators. At the national level, the Liberal-National coalition, which had governed continuously since 2013, was defeated in the 2022 federal election, resulting in a Labor majority. Various competitive arrangements exist at the state level, such as in Victoria and Queensland, where Labor has been dominant for extended periods.
Labor is traditionally associated with left-wing politics, combining economic priorities with social and cultural policies. The Liberal-National coalition advocates conservative policies across economic, social, and cultural matters. Although the Liberals and Nationals are independent parties, they do not compete against each other in elections and generally operate as a cohesive coalition. The National party primarily draws support from regional and rural voters, making Australia unique internationally for having a significant agrarian party. Smaller parties and independents cater to niche electoral markets, including environmentalism, nativism, and integrity.
A wide range of ideological positions and manifestos are presented to voters at election time. For example, significant differences between the major parties were apparent in the 2022 federal election regarding aged care policy, corruption and the federal integrity commission, childcare policy, climate change policy, housing policy, the Voice and Indigenous recognition, and health policy (Guardian staff 2022).
The preferential voting system used in Australian elections allows voters to rank-order parties/candidates, enabling them to express complex preferences. Left-leaning supporters often give their first preference vote to Labor or the Greens and their second preference to the other left-leaning party. Right-leaning voters may distribute their preferences between the Liberal-National Coalition and right-leaning minor parties like One Nation. To capitalize on preferential voting, parties issue ‘how to vote’ cards to guide their supporters on allocating preferences.
While natural affinities exist between parties on the same side of the ideological spectrum, conflicts can arise among these ‘ideological friends.’ For example, relations between Labor and the Greens have been strained over their disagreement on addressing the housing affordability crisis (Speers 2023). Labor proposed a housing fund to build 30,000 social and affordable homes over three years, while the Greens called for more urgent action, including a rent freeze. Similar tensions have occurred on the right. During the 2022 federal election, the Liberal-National Coalition placed One Nation below Jacquie Lambie on its how-to-vote card for the Tasmanian senate elections. One Nation responded by directing its supporters to preference Labor ahead of the Liberal-National Coalition in five seats (Karp and Hinchliffe 2022).
Although parties present a wide range of positions, there has been some weakening of the connection between these positions and the demands and preferences of ordinary citizens. One reason may be the low and declining levels of party membership across the system (Oliver 2014), as party members traditionally played a key role in conveying grassroots views to party elites. The tenor of political discourse, in parliament and the media, may also have accelerated disillusionment and disengagement.
Citations:
Guardian staff. 2022. “Who should I vote for? Guide to seven key policies in the 2022 Australian federal election where Labor and Coalition differ.” The Guardian, May 20. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/20/australia-federal-election-2022-labor-liberal-coalition-australian-policy-guide-who-should-can-i-vote-for-aged-care-icac-childcare-climate-change
Karp, P., and Hinchliffe, J. 2023. “One Nation Directs Preferences to Labor in Five Seats Targeting Left-leaning Liberals.” The Guardian April 28. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/apr/28/one-nation-directs-preferences-to-labor-in-five-seats-targeting-left-leaning-liberals
Speers, D. 2023. “Labor and the Greens aren’t strangers to conflict. But in this week’s housing stand-off, something snapped.” ABC News June 22. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-22/greens-playing-politics-housing-bill-double-dissolution/102505478
Oliver, A. 2014. Are Australians Disenchanted with Democracy? Papers on Parliament No. 62. https://www.aph.gov.au/senate/~/~/link.aspx?_id=01FD7901F7E14E9A86A44F9C217BFEC6&_z=z
To what extent do political parties retain their ability to enable cross-party cooperation in policymaking and implementation?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, to achieving effective cross-party cooperation.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose no significant barriers to achieving effective cross-party cooperation.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose some significant barriers to achieving effective cross-party cooperation.
2
1
1
Existing obstacles in the party system, by law and in practice, pose various significant barriers to achieving effective cross-party cooperation.
There is general acceptance of liberal democratic values and institutions among the major political parties, with significant evidence of their commitment to sustaining these values. Major-party leaders and candidates typically frame critiques of political institutions around improving democratic integrity. However, commitment to democratic values is weaker among some minor parties, as evidenced by their willingness to transgress parliamentary conventions and other norms.
The major parties’ competitiveness can produce tribalism, hindering cooperation on important policy matters. However, the majoritarian nature of the Australian political system means that cross-party cooperation is generally less crucial than in proportional representation systems. The ruling party typically has a majority in the lower house and requires only a handful of votes from independents or minor parties to pass legislation through the upper house..
The major parties’ competitiveness can produce tribalism, hindering cooperation on important policy matters. However, the majoritarian nature of the Australian political system means that cross-party cooperation is generally less crucial than in proportional representation systems. The ruling party typically has a majority in the lower house and requires only a handful of votes from independents or minor parties to pass legislation through the upper house..
Graph View
To what extent can citizens and residents access official information?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, for citizens seeking to access official information.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles for citizens seeking to access official information.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles for citizens seeking to access official information.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose many/various significant obstacles for citizens seeking to access official information.
Australia has well-respected Freedom of Information (FOI) rules, enabling public and media access to information influencing public debates. However, there are significant loopholes, such as cabinet deliberations being exempt from FOI, creating incentives for important discussions to be channeled through cabinet processes to avoid FOI requirements. There is also evidence of decreasing resources for servicing FOI requests, leading to longer wait times for information releases. For example, approximately 30% of FOI requests were not dealt with within the required 30 days (Australia Institute 2023). Additionally, there is increasing rejection of FOI requests and more extensive redaction of released material (Knaus and Bassano 2019). Consequently, public support for the FOI system is declining, with only one in five Australians highly confident that the FOI system provides access to all government information they are entitled to (Australia Institute 2023).
Citations:
Australia Institute. 2023. “Lengthy Delays Undermine Confidence in Australian FOI Process.” https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/lengthy-delays-undermine-confidence-in-australian-foi-process
Knaus, C., and J. Bassano. 2019. “How a Flawed Freedom-of-Information Regime Keeps Australians in the Dark.” The Guardian January 2. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/02/how-a-flawed-freedom-of-information-regime-keeps-australians-in-the-dark
Citations:
Australia Institute. 2023. “Lengthy Delays Undermine Confidence in Australian FOI Process.” https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/lengthy-delays-undermine-confidence-in-australian-foi-process
Knaus, C., and J. Bassano. 2019. “How a Flawed Freedom-of-Information Regime Keeps Australians in the Dark.” The Guardian January 2. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/02/how-a-flawed-freedom-of-information-regime-keeps-australians-in-the-dark