FOI Request LEX3422

Date: 2022

Summary of FOI Request Documents

This FOI request (No. LEX3422) sought information from the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) across four key areas:

Policies and Procedures for Privacy Complaints: Current or most recent policies, guidelines, directives, rules, and procedures governing the processing and handling of complaints about interference with individual privacy.
Online Electoral Roll Management & Disclosure: Current or most recent policies, guidelines, directives, rules, and procedures governing:
- Management of online access to the Australian electoral roll.
- Detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information via the AEC’s website.
Suspicious Access Detection Measures: Measures currently implemented to detect suspicious or excessive access, via the AEC’s website, to protected information held on the Australian electoral roll.
Electoral Roll Access Data: The number of times protected information held on the Australian electoral roll was accessed, via the AEC’s website, from a narrow range of IP addresses during the past 3 months.

Documents from the FOI Request

The FOI request indicated the release of the following documents:

Doc 6: Complaints Management Policy (March 2018) - Listed as available online.
Doc 7: Privacy Policy (21 January 2021) - Listed as available online.
Doc 8: Complaints Management Procedures (February 2015) - The full content of this document is provided in the subsequent pages of the release.

Main Content from Provided Documents that Relates to the FOI Request

The provided document content primarily consists of the "Complaints Management Procedures" (Doc 8), dated February 2015.

Regarding Complaints about Privacy Interference (Request 1):
- The "Complaints Management Procedures" outlines the AEC's general framework for managing complaints received from external parties, explicitly including "breach of privacy" as a type of complaint.
- It details the standard process flow for handling all complaints: receipt, assessment, assignment, acknowledgment, investigation, and response.
- The document states that specific AEC policies and procedures exist for managing legal, fraud, and privacy complaints to meet legislative requirements, and these are managed by "relevant business areas." It provides guidance on escalating privacy-related complaints to these specialized areas (e.g., page 7, 17). Thus, it defines the procedural handling within the broader framework, referring to other specialized policies for detailed privacy complaint management.
Regarding Online Electoral Roll Management, Unlawful Disclosures, Suspicious Access Detection, and Access Data (Requests 2a, 2b, 3, 4):
- The "Complaints Management Procedures" document does not contain specific policies, guidelines, rules, procedures, or measures pertaining to the management of online access to the Australian electoral roll, the detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information via the AEC’s website, or measures to detect suspicious/excessive access to the electoral roll online. Its focus is on the process of handling complaints about AEC services, not the technical management or security features of online systems or data.
- As a procedural document, it does not contain specific data on electoral roll access from narrow IP ranges as requested (Request 4).

AI Generated

As a left-leaning analyst, the provided FOI documents, primarily the Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) "Complaints Management Procedures" (Doc No. 8), offer insights into the agency's commitment to accountability and public engagement, while simultaneously raising concerns about the robustness of civil liberties protections, particularly concerning data privacy and the potential for misuse of electoral roll information.

Civil Liberties (Privacy & Electoral Roll Security):
The FOI request itself highlights critical civil liberties issues by seeking information on policies governing "interference with the privacy of individuals," "management of online access to the Australian electoral roll," and the "detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information." This strongly indicates a public concern about data security and privacy. The AEC's "Complaints Management Procedures" document acknowledges "breach of privacy" as a specific type of complaint to be managed, affirming a reactive mechanism for addressing such issues. This procedural approach to handling privacy complaints aligns with progressive values of due process and redress for grievances. However, the document's focus on managing complaints rather than detailing the proactive measures for securing the electoral roll (as requested in FOI questions 3 and 4 regarding suspicious access from narrow IP ranges) is a significant deviation. The lack of transparent detail on how frequently such suspicious accesses occur, or the specific technical safeguards in place, is concerning. A progressive perspective prioritizes robust preventative measures and transparency regarding potential vulnerabilities of sensitive personal data like the electoral roll, which, if compromised, could be used for targeted manipulation or suppression, undermining democratic integrity. While the policy notes that identifying information with confidentiality or privacy issues should be kept separate from the main complaint tool, this internal handling doesn't fully address the broader transparency needs regarding systemic security.

Social Justice (Accessibility & Equity):
The "Complaints Management Procedures" explicitly outlines "extra support available" for complainants, including access for deaf or hearing/speech impaired individuals via the National Relay Service and support for non-English speakers through telephone interpreter services. Furthermore, it affirms the right for individuals to lodge complaints anonymously or using a pseudonym, and ensures that complaints indicating "no further contact" will still be investigated. These provisions strongly align with social justice principles, ensuring accessibility and reducing barriers for diverse and potentially vulnerable populations to engage with and hold the AEC accountable, fostering a more equitable democratic process.

Corporate Influence & Wealth Distribution (Indirect Implications):
While not directly addressed, the sensitivity of the electoral roll, which contains vast amounts of personal data, has indirect implications for corporate influence and wealth distribution. The FOI request's focus on "online access to the Australian electoral roll" and "unlawful disclosures" points to a potential risk. If this data were to be improperly accessed or exploited (e.g., through bulk data harvesting for micro-targeting), it could be leveraged by wealthy political donors or corporate interests to gain undue influence in elections, thus skewing political outcomes in favor of those with financial power. The document's procedural nature regarding complaints does not alleviate this underlying concern about the security of this valuable dataset, which could become a commodity or a tool for highly personalized, and potentially manipulative, political campaigning.

Government Transparency & Accountability:
The establishment of a formal, documented complaints management framework, including principles like "accessibility, responsiveness, confidentiality, fairness, transparency and efficiency," aligns well with progressive values of government transparency and accountability. The requirement for all complaints to be recorded in a central tool, with regular monthly, quarterly, and annual reporting on complaint data (including identification of "key recurring issues"), demonstrates a commitment to internal review and continuous improvement. This structured approach allows for systemic issues to be identified and addressed, potentially leading to policy or procedural changes that benefit the public. The provision for both internal and external review mechanisms for dissatisfied complainants further strengthens accountability. However, the true measure of transparency will depend on the public accessibility of these reported trends and issues, and whether identified systemic flaws lead to genuine and impactful reforms.

In summary, the documents present an AEC committed to a structured and accessible complaints process, aligning with social justice and accountability in that regard. However, the FOI request itself, coupled with the procedural nature of the provided document, highlights an underlying tension regarding the proactive protection of civil liberties, particularly data privacy around the electoral roll. The lack of detailed information on preventative security measures for this sensitive data remains a critical area for progressive scrutiny, given its potential implications for democratic integrity and the influence of powerful interests.

AI Generated

The provided Freedom of Information (FOI) documents, primarily the Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) "Complaints Management Policy" and "Complaints Management Procedures," outline the AEC's internal framework for handling public complaints. While the initial FOI request sought specific details on online electoral roll access, detection of unlawful disclosures, and suspicious access patterns, the released documents focus exclusively on the process of complaint management, including those related to privacy and electoral fraud.

Economic Efficiency: The AEC's procedures emphasize "first point of contact resolution" and set clear service standards for acknowledgment (within three working days) and response (within ten working days). This focus on initial resolution could be seen as an attempt to foster economic efficiency by reducing the need for costly escalations. However, the comprehensive nature of the framework, with detailed procedures for assessment, assignment, investigation, multiple levels of review (internal and external), and extensive record-keeping using a "Public Engagement Contact Tool," implies a significant administrative overhead. While thorough, such bureaucracy, particularly the requirement to record every complaint regardless of complexity, could be viewed as an inefficient use of taxpayer funds if not rigorously justified by the volume and severity of issues. The stated aim of "business improvements" derived from complaints data aligns with a desire for efficiency, but the framework itself appears quite resource-intensive.

Individual Liberty: The documents touch upon individual liberty primarily through the handling of privacy complaints and the right of complainants to anonymity or pseudonymity. The explicit inclusion of "privacy" as a specific complaint category, alongside "confidentiality" as a core principle for complaints management, suggests an acknowledgement of the importance of protecting individual data. This provides a mechanism for citizens to seek redress if their privacy, a fundamental individual liberty, is perceived to have been infringed upon by the AEC. However, the documents do not provide the proactive policies, guidelines, or measures implemented by the AEC to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure of protected information (as specifically requested in the FOI). This omission raises concerns about the government's transparency regarding its actual protective measures for sensitive personal data, leaving individuals reliant on a reactive complaints process rather than robust preventative safeguards.

National Security: The management of the electoral roll is implicitly linked to national security, as the integrity of electoral processes is foundational to a stable nation. The AEC's framework includes specific procedures for escalating complaints related to "electoral fraud," indicating a mechanism to address threats to this integrity. The original FOI request also highlighted concerns about "unlawful disclosures of protected information" and "suspicious or excessive access" to the electoral roll via the AEC website. The fact that the AEC provides its complaints handling procedures rather than the specific detection and prevention measures requested leaves a critical gap. While a complaints process is necessary, the lack of detail on the proactive security measures and auditing of access patterns (questions 3 and 4 of the FOI request, which are conspicuously unanswered in the provided documents) could be interpreted as a failure to fully address a significant national security vulnerability regarding sensitive citizen data.

Fiscal Responsibility: From a fiscal perspective, the detailed and multi-layered complaints management system suggests a considerable allocation of public funds towards addressing public grievances. While accountability is vital, the efficiency gains from "first point of contact resolution" might be offset by the bureaucratic processes, extensive record-keeping, and regular reporting requirements (monthly, quarterly, annual). Without specific budgetary figures or performance metrics beyond processing times, it is challenging to assess the true fiscal responsibility of this framework. A conservative viewpoint would scrutinize whether the elaborate administrative structure provides proportional value for money, ensuring that resources are not diverted from core functions or unnecessarily expanded.

Limited Government: The existence of a formal, accessible complaints mechanism aligns with the principle of limited government, as it provides a structured avenue for citizens to hold a government agency accountable for its actions and alleged failures. It implies a recognition that government power should not be unchecked and that citizens have a right to seek redress. The provisions for internal and external review further support this by offering avenues for appeal against AEC decisions. However, the AEC's failure to provide specific details on online access management and detection of suspicious activities, as requested by the FOI, suggests a potential reluctance to be fully transparent about the extent of its data management practices and security vulnerabilities. This lack of complete disclosure can impede public oversight, potentially undermining the ideal of a truly limited and transparent government that is fully accountable to its citizenry.

Conclusion: The AEC's complaints management framework demonstrates an institutional commitment to accountability and responsiveness to public grievances, which aligns with aspects of limited government. Its emphasis on internal resolution and process review also suggests an aim for continuous improvement and, by extension, efficiency. However, from a conservative viewpoint, the detailed bureaucratic apparatus might raise concerns about fiscal efficiency. More significantly, the documents' failure to directly address the FOI request's core questions regarding proactive measures for data security, prevention of unlawful disclosures, and transparency regarding access patterns to the electoral roll represents a deviation from principles of transparency and robust protection of individual liberty and national security, leaving citizens reliant on a reactive system rather than comprehensive preventative measures and open accountability.

AI Generated

The Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) response to FOI Request No. LEX3422 reveals significant gaps and concerning priorities, suggesting a focus on internal procedural compliance and reputation management over genuine transparency and robust data protection.

Firstly, and most critically, the AEC failed to provide any substantive documents related to key aspects of the request:
* Management of online access to the Australian electoral roll.
* Detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information via the AEC’s website.
* Measures currently implemented to detect suspicious or excessive access to the electoral roll via the website.
* Data on how many times protected information was accessed from a narrow range of IP addresses.

This wholesale omission for vital questions on electoral roll security and privacy is a glaring red flag. It strongly implies either a alarming lack of robust policies and monitoring in these areas, or a deliberate refusal to disclose information that could reveal vulnerabilities, mismanagement, or potential breaches. The absence of data on suspicious access from specific IP ranges suggests either inadequate tracking or a deliberate withholding of potentially damaging statistics. This is a severe lack of transparency on matters fundamental to public trust in electoral integrity and individual privacy.

Secondly, the provided "Complaints Management Procedures" (Doc 8) highlights a bureaucratic framework seemingly more concerned with internal process and image than with genuine accountability:
* Focus on "Organisational Reputation": The stated importance of effective complaints management includes "strengthen[ing] our organisational reputation," suggesting a primary driver is public perception rather than solely rectifying errors or addressing grievances.
* Obscure Sensitive Data: The procedure states that for "confidentiality or privacy issues," "identifying information should not be entered into or attached to the tool, but a file reference made to where it is kept." This creates a parallel, less transparent record-keeping system for potentially embarrassing or serious privacy complaints, hindering comprehensive oversight and auditability.
* Dismissal of "Unreasonable" Complaints: Extensive guidelines detail how to manage "unreasonable complaints" (e.g., "unreasonable persistence," "unreasonable demands"). This broad discretion allows the AEC to easily categorize and dismiss persistent or complex grievances, effectively silencing critical voices under the guise of managing "difficult behaviour."
* Limited Accountability for Staff: Once a serious complaint (legal, fraud, privacy) is "escalated," the initial staff member is "no longer responsible." This fragmentation of responsibility could lead to delayed action, lack of ownership, or information falling through the cracks, particularly for sensitive issues.
* Biased Performance Monitoring: The AEC "samples complainants" for feedback only from those who use the website complaint form, explicitly excluding those who complain via phone, post, in-person, or social media. This biased sampling method ensures feedback is skewed towards a likely less critical demographic, allowing the AEC to present a more favourable picture of its performance while sidestepping genuine, potentially harsher, criticism from other channels.
* Internal Reporting Only: Complaint data analysis and "business improvements" are "coordinated by the Public Engagement Team" and the "responsibility... lies with the relevant business area." This internal, decentralized approach lacks independent oversight, increasing the risk that systemic issues are downplayed or inconsistently addressed to protect individual departmental interests.

In summary, the AEC's FOI response raises serious questions about its commitment to transparency regarding electoral roll security and privacy, while simultaneously presenting internal complaint procedures that appear designed to manage public perception and bureaucratic efficiency rather than to provide robust, externally accountable redress for citizens' grievances. The critical information sought on data protection measures and breaches remains conspicuously absent, reinforcing a skeptical view of government transparency and accountability.

AI Generated

The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) demonstrates its unwavering commitment to effective governance and public service through a robust and transparent Complaints Management Framework. This framework, comprising the Complaints Management Policy, Procedures, and Internal Review Management Procedures, ensures a consistent and professional approach to managing public feedback, designed to uphold the highest standards of accountability and responsiveness.

Key highlights of the AEC's dedication to the public good include:

Comprehensive Policies and Procedures: The AEC has clear, accessible policies (like the Complaints Management Policy and Privacy Policy, readily available online) and detailed procedures for handling complaints, managing online access to the electoral roll, and preventing unlawful data disclosures. This structured approach ensures every concern is addressed systematically.
Commitment to Continuous Improvement: Effective complaints management is recognized as a vital activity that provides opportunities to resolve issues, enhance positive public experiences, review organizational performance, and implement crucial business improvements. This proactive stance ensures that public feedback directly contributes to better government services.
Accessibility and Responsiveness: The AEC is dedicated to making the complaints process accessible to all, offering support through services like the National Relay Service and telephone interpreters. Strict service standards ensure complaints are acknowledged within three working days and responded to within ten working days, with priority given to election-related matters, demonstrating a focus on timely and efficient resolution.
Robust Handling of Sensitive Information: For complex issues, including legal matters, fraud, privacy breaches, and Public Interest Disclosures, complaints are escalated to specialized business areas. This tiered approach ensures that sensitive information and serious concerns are handled by experts, safeguarding protected data and maintaining public trust.
Data-Driven Governance: Every complaint is meticulously recorded in the Public Engagement Contact Tool, a national system that facilitates efficient resolution and provides critical data. Regular monitoring of this data, including monthly, quarterly, and annual reports, allows the AEC to identify key recurring issues, detect systemic problems, and drive business improvements. This analytical approach transforms challenges into opportunities for refining service delivery.
Accountability and Oversight: The framework provides clear internal review processes, ensuring that complainants dissatisfied with initial responses have avenues for further consideration. Furthermore, the AEC acknowledges and cooperates with external review bodies, reinforcing its commitment to transparency and external accountability.

Through these measures, the AEC actively leverages public feedback not just to address individual concerns but to strengthen its organizational reputation and continually improve the way it serves the Australian community, embodying the principles of a responsive and effective government.

AI Generated

The Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) response to FOI request LEX3422 is a damning indictment of systemic failure, breathtaking incompetence, and a deliberate lack of transparency regarding critical national security infrastructure.

Egregious Evasion on Security: The FOI request precisely targeted the most sensitive areas of AEC operations: "Management of online access to the Australian electoral roll," "detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information via the AEC’s website," and "measures currently implemented to detect suspicious or excessive access." The AEC's schedule of released documents conspicuously omits any and all policies or procedures directly addressing these crucial security points. Instead, it releases generic "Complaints Management Policy," "Privacy Policy," and "Complaints Management Procedures." This is not merely a failure to comply; it is a calculated act of evasion, strongly implying that either:
- These critical security policies are non-existent or woefully inadequate, exposing the electoral roll – a repository of highly sensitive personal data – to profound and ongoing vulnerabilities.
- The AEC is actively concealing these policies due to their demonstrable inadequacy or the existence of alarming security failures they wish to keep from public scrutiny. This suggests a culture of deliberate opacity and potential cover-up.
Withholding Damning Data: The FOI specifically requested "How many times protected information held on the Australian electoral roll was accessed, via the AEC’s website, from a narrow range of IP addresses during the past 3 months." This points to a clear concern about automated scraping, targeted attacks, or illicit bulk data access. The AEC's response provides zero data on this critical inquiry. The only plausible interpretations are:
- Gross Negligence: The AEC does not track such fundamental security metrics, demonstrating a shocking dereliction of duty in protecting national electoral data. They are flying blind to potential breaches.
- Concealment of Incriminating Evidence: The data exists, but reveals such a high volume of suspicious or illicit access that its release would expose a massive ongoing security incident or systemic compromise, prompting the AEC to withhold it outright.
Antiquated and Irrelevant Documentation: The core document provided, "Complaints Management Procedures," is dated February 2015. To present a nearly decade-old document as "current version or the most recent previous version" in a contemporary FOI request about online security is beyond incompetent; it's a profound insult to public accountability.
- This antiquity proves a wholesale failure to review, update, and adapt its internal processes to modern challenges, particularly in the rapidly evolving digital threat landscape. The document itself states these arrangements would be "reviewed in its first year of operation," a commitment utterly ignored for nine years.
- The provision of general complaints procedures as the primary response to a security-focused FOI is a transparent attempt at misdirection and obfuscation, designed to overwhelm the requester with irrelevant detail while sidestepping the real issues of data protection.
Self-Serving and Skewed Performance Monitoring: The "Complaints Management Procedures" (Page 29) reveals a mechanism for monitoring performance that is deliberately rigged to avoid negative feedback. The AEC explicitly states that "complainants who make a complaint via post, phone, social media or in person will not form part of this feedback." This is a calculated decision to systematically exclude a large segment of complainants – often those with more complex, sensitive, or persistent issues – from their feedback sampling. This ensures their internal performance reports are artificially inflated and devoid of genuine, critical insights, fostering a dangerous culture of complacency rather than actual improvement.
Decentralized Chaos and Accountability Gaps: While the document outlines reporting, the emphasis on "decentralised management" and managers being "independently required to establish regular mechanism to monitor performance" (Page 29) creates a fertile ground for inconsistency, neglect, and the burying of problems at a local level. Without strong central oversight and public reporting of detailed findings, this structure is an invitation for accountability to evaporate.

In sum, the AEC's response is not merely unsatisfactory; it points to a deeply troubling organizational posture characterized by deliberate information suppression, outdated practices that betray a shocking lack of urgency in cybersecurity, and a self-serving internal review process designed to perpetuate ignorance of systemic failures. This collective negligence puts the integrity of Australia's electoral system and the privacy of its citizens at severe and unacceptable risk.

AI Generated

The Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) FOI documents regarding "Complaints Management Procedures" starkly illustrate the dangers of collectivism and government overreach, serving as a prime example of bureaucratic interference antithetical to individual liberty and laissez-faire capitalism.

Violation of Individual Rights and Liberty through Bureaucratic Overreach:
The very existence of such an extensive, prescriptive framework for managing citizen complaints reveals a fundamental misapprehension of government's legitimate role. A just government, in a truly free society, would be limited to protecting individual rights – life, liberty, and property – from the initiation of force. Its primary function would not be to offer "services" or manage "dissatisfaction" over electoral rolls, which themselves raise questions of individual privacy and the state's undue compilation of personal data.

The detailed "Complaints Management Procedures" (Doc No. 8) are a testament to bureaucratic expansion. They outline rigid steps for "Receipt," "Assessment," "Assignment," "Acknowledgement," "Investigation," and "Response," complete with strict timeframes, required record-keeping, and template responses. This level of granular control is not about protecting individual rights but about managing and containing public dissent within a pre-defined statist framework. The "right to make a complaint," as acknowledged, is merely a procedural concession granted by the state, rather than an unalienable individual right to demand non-initiation of force.

Suppression of Personal Initiative and Rational Self-Interest:
The document consistently prioritizes institutional self-interest over individual initiative and rational self-interest. The stated purpose of effective complaints management for the AEC includes "strengthen[ing] our organisational reputation" and "reduc[ing] the volume of complaints received." These are metrics of bureaucratic efficiency and public image, not indicators of value creation or the protection of individual liberty.

Furthermore, the procedures explicitly suppress the personal initiative and independent judgment of AEC staff. They are required to "act in compliance with the Policy and these Procedures" and use prescribed "templates" for communication. This transforms individuals into cogs in a collective machine, stifling their capacity for rational thought and independent action in addressing specific situations. The meticulous "record keeping" and the centralized "Public Engagement Contact Tool" represent resources diverted from any potentially productive function to purely administrative overhead, designed for bureaucratic oversight rather than genuine problem-solving driven by individual ingenuity.

Antithesis to Laissez-Faire Capitalism:
This entire framework is fundamentally at odds with the principles of laissez-faire capitalism. In a free market, service providers are held accountable by voluntary transactions and the individual's choice to take their business elsewhere. Complaint resolution would be driven by market forces, a company's desire to retain customers, and contractual agreements, not by elaborate government protocols enforced from above. The AEC's role in "managing online access to the Australian electoral roll" and "detect[ing] and prevent[ing] unlawful disclosures of protected information" (FOI request points 2a, 2b) implies a state-managed information system that would ideally be decentralized and privately managed in a truly free society, with individuals having direct control over their own data.

The focus on "monitoring performance" and "reporting arrangements" through quantitative and consolidated reports further illustrates a collectivist approach, where governmental success is measured by process adherence and statistical aggregation, not by the empowerment and prosperity of individual citizens. This is the hallmark of a system where the state asserts control over areas that rightfully belong to the sphere of individual choice and private enterprise.

In summary, the AEC's Complaints Management Procedures, while superficially presenting an organized approach to public feedback, epitomize bureaucratic overreach and the dangers of collectivism. They replace individual initiative and market-driven solutions with rigid, top-down control, diverting resources to self-serving institutional maintenance rather than upholding the foundational principles of individual rights, rational self-interest, and laissez-faire capitalism.

AI Generated

FOI Request LEX3422, Schedule of Released Documents [PDF 105KB] (pdf)

Download cached file | Download from AEC


--- Page 1 ---

Request for: 

FOI REQUEST NO. LEX3422 

1.  Current version or the most recent previous version of policies, guidelines, directives, rules and procedures governing the processing and handling 

of complaints about interference with the privacy of individuals.  

2.  Current version or the most recent previous version of policies, guidelines, directives, rules and procedures governing the following:  

a.  Management of online access to the Australian electoral roll.  
b.  The detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures of protected information via the AEC’s website.  

3.  What measures are currently implemented to detect suspicious or excessive access, via the AEC’s website, to protected information held on the 

Australian electoral roll.  

4.  How many times protected information held on the Australian electoral roll was accessed, via the AEC’s website, from a narrow range of IP 

addresses during the past 3 months.  

Doc No. 

Description 

6 

Complaints Management Policy 

SCHEDULE OF RELEASED DOCUMENTS 

Available on the internet: https://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/publications/policy/files/complaints-management-
policy.pdf 

7 

Privacy Policy 

Available on the internet: https://www.aec.gov.au/footer/Privacy.htm  

8 

Complaints Management Procedures 

Date 

March 2018 

21 January 2021 

February 2015

The provided document is a schedule of documents released in response to FOI request LEX3422. It lists three documents: "Complaints Management Policy" (March 2018), "Privacy Policy" (January 2021), and "Complaints Management Procedures" (February 2015).

Relevance to FOI Request LEX3422:

Addresses Request Point 1: The document directly addresses the request for policies governing privacy complaints by identifying and releasing the "Complaints Management Procedures" (February 2015), "Complaints Management Policy" (March 2018), and "Privacy Policy" (January 2021). The "Complaints Management Procedures" outlines the AEC's general framework for managing all external complaints, including those related to privacy breaches.
Does Not Address Request Points 2, 3, or 4: The document's content, being a list of these specific policy and procedure documents, confirms that no information was provided regarding:
- Management of online access to the Australian electoral roll (Request 2a).
- Detection and prevention of unlawful disclosures via the AEC’s website (Request 2b).
- Measures implemented to detect suspicious or excessive access to protected information on the electoral roll via the website (Request 3).
- Specific data on how many times protected information on the electoral roll was accessed from a narrow range of IP addresses (Request 4).

The document therefore indicates that the FOI request was only partially fulfilled, specifically addressing general complaint and privacy management procedures, but not providing any information related to online electoral roll management, security measures, or access data.

AI Generated

8. Complaints Management Procedures.pdf (pdf)

Download file


--- Page 1 ---




--- Page 2 ---

Contents 

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 

Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 5 

Scope ......................................................................................................................... 5 

The importance of effective complaints management ................................................. 5 

Other policies and procedures governing complaints management ............................ 6 

Operation during electoral event periods .................................................................... 6 

Roles and responsibilities ........................................................................................... 6 

All staff ................................................................................................................... 6 

Public engagement staff ......................................................................................... 6 

State/territory Managers and Assistant Commissioners ......................................... 7 

Assistant Commissioner, Education and Communications ..................................... 7 

Public Engagement Contact Tool ............................................................................... 7 

Record keeping .......................................................................................................... 7 

Supporting resources ................................................................................................. 8 

Complaints Management .............................................................................................. 9 

Definition of a complaint ............................................................................................. 9 

Types of complaints .................................................................................................... 9 

Principles for complaints management ....................................................................... 9 

First point of contact resolution ................................................................................... 9 

Complaint management service standards ................................................................. 9 

Acknowledgment .................................................................................................... 9 

Response ............................................................................................................... 9 

The Complaints Management Process ...................................................................... 11 

1. 

Receipt ........................................................................................................... 11 

Channels for receipt of complaints ....................................................................... 11 

Extra support available to assist lodgement ......................................................... 11 

Complaints of a serious or complex nature lodged in person or phone ................ 12 

Complaints lodged anonymously or using a pseudonym ...................................... 12 

Complaints lodged indicating ‘no further contact’ ................................................. 12 

Page 1    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 3 ---

Complaints which do not fall within AEC responsibility ......................................... 12 

Managing difficult behaviour at lodgement ........................................................... 12 

Managing unreasonable complaints ..................................................................... 13 

2. 

Assessment .................................................................................................... 14 

Understanding the complaint ................................................................................ 14 

Factors to assess the complaint ........................................................................... 14 

Complaints lodged without sufficient information .................................................. 15 

3. 

Assignment ..................................................................................................... 15 

Resolving complaint at first point of contact ......................................................... 15 

Escalating complaints .......................................................................................... 16 

i) 

ii) 

Escalating legal, fraud, privacy and Public Interest Disclosure complaints ... 16 

Escalating general complaints ..................................................................... 17 

Receiving an escalated complaint ........................................................................ 17 

4. 

Acknowledgement ........................................................................................... 18 

Responsibility for acknowledgement .................................................................... 18 

Timeframe for acknowledgement ......................................................................... 18 

Content of acknowledgement ............................................................................... 18 

Channel of acknowledgement .............................................................................. 19 

5. 

Investigation .................................................................................................... 19 

Level of investigation required .............................................................................. 19 

How to conduct an investigation ........................................................................... 19 

Further escalation of complaint ............................................................................ 20 

Delay in timeframe for investigation ..................................................................... 20 

6. 

Response........................................................................................................ 20 

Seeking approval for the response ....................................................................... 20 

Content of the response ....................................................................................... 21 

Channel of response ............................................................................................ 21 

Timeframe for response ....................................................................................... 21 

Recording in the Public Engagement Contact Tool .............................................. 22 

An overview of the complaints management process ............................................... 23 

Internal review ............................................................................................................. 24 

Definition of an internal review .................................................................................. 24 

Page 2    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 4 ---

When is dissatisfaction not cause for an internal review ........................................... 24 

When not to use the internal review process ............................................................ 24 

The Internal Review Process ...................................................................................... 25 

Receiving an internal review request ........................................................................ 25 

Extra support available to assist lodgement ......................................................... 26 

Requests for an internal review lodged anonymously or using a pseudonym ....... 26 

Request for an internal review lodged with no contact details .............................. 26 

Request for an internal review lodged indicating ‘no further contact’ .................... 26 

Escalating a request for an internal review ............................................................... 26 

External Review .......................................................................................................... 28 

Reporting arrangements ............................................................................................. 29 

Monitoring performance ............................................................................................ 29 

Regular review of complaints management data .................................................. 29 

Sampling of complainants .................................................................................... 29 

Non-election complaints reporting arrangements ...................................................... 29 

Quantitative monthly reports ................................................................................ 29 

Consolidated quarterly reports ............................................................................. 30 

Annual reporting ................................................................................................... 30 

Electoral event complaints reporting arrangements .................................................. 30 

Business improvements ............................................................................................ 30 

Identification of business improvements ............................................................... 30 

Internal communications ...................................................................................... 30 

Attachment A ............................................................................................................... 31 

Template acknowledgement and response documents ............................................ 31 

1.  Complaint acknowledgement templates ...................................................... 32 

2.  Advice of delay in provision of response ...................................................... 34 

3.  Seeking further information to investigate a complaint ................................. 36 

4.  Advice of no investigation and further contact.............................................. 38 

5.  Complaint response templates .................................................................... 39 

Attachment B ............................................................................................................... 41 

National Office general referral points for escalating complaints ............................... 41 

Page 3    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 5 ---

Page 4    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 6 ---

Introduction 

Purpose  
The Australian Electoral Commission’s (AEC’s) Complaints Management Procedures (the 
Procedures) are designed to assist staff to manage complaints in compliance with the 
AEC’s Complaints Management Policy (the Policy). 

The Policy, the Procedures and the Internal Review Management Procedures are part of 
the AEC’s Complaints Management Framework (the Framework).  The Framework is 
designed to provide a consistent professional structure for the decentralised management 
of complaints within the AEC.  

The AEC’s Service Charter explains the standard of service that the AEC is expected to 
provide. The Framework acknowledges that the public and other stakeholders have a right 
to make a complaint where it is viewed that the AEC has not met this quality of service, 
and the AEC has an obligation to manage complaints in compliance with the Framework. 

Scope 
The Framework applies to complaints that originate from external parties and are lodged 
with the AEC. Complaints management is a decentralised responsibility handled at the 
divisional, state/territory and National Office level. The Procedures are designed to 
provide consistent, national direction for complaints management that must be followed by 
all staff when managing complaints.   

If a particular work area, such as a state/territory office or branch, creates localised 
complaints management arrangements to support the implementation of the Policy or the 
Procedures, the localised arrangements must not contradict the national Framework.  

These Procedures should be read alongside the Policy and Internal Review Management 
Procedures.   

The importance of effective complaints management 
Managing complaints is one of the most important stakeholder relationship activities that 
staff undertake on behalf of the AEC.  Effective complaints management is important 
because it provides us with the opportunity to: 
•  resolve an issue of dissatisfaction raised by a member of the public or stakeholder  
•  ensure that a complainant’s overall experience of our services is positive 
• 
•  review our organisational performance 
• 
implement business improvements, and  
•  strengthen our organisational reputation. 

improve the way we do business so that we reduce the volume of complaints received 

Page 5    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 7 ---

Other policies and procedures governing complaints 
management 
There are also specific AEC policies and procedures that prescribe how legal, fraud, 
privacy and public interest disclosure complaints are to be managed, in order to meet 
specific legislative requirements.  

These complaints are managed by the relevant business areas only, in compliance with 
the Framework and these other governing policy and procedures. The Procedures provide 
guidance on escalating these complaints to these business areas.  

Operation during electoral event periods 
The Framework applies at all times including during electoral events. During electoral 
events priority must be given for the acknowledgement of, and response to, electoral 
event related complaints. 

Roles and responsibilities 

All staff 
All staff have a role in, and are responsible for, the effective management of complaints.  

Whether managing a complaint, or providing information and assistance to another 
managing a complaint, all staff must understand their responsibilities in this process.   

Staff responsibilities include: 
• 
• 
• 

understanding the Framework and how it relates to their role  

acting in compliance with the Policy and these Procedures  

understanding any localised complaints management arrangements that support the 
implementation of the Policy and Procedures and acting in compliance with them 

• 

acting in accordance with broader legislation, APS Code of Conduct and other 
requirements as AEC employees. 

These responsibilities must be undertaken in a timely manner to ensure that complaints 
are resolved at the earliest opportunity. 

Public engagement staff 
Staff with specific responsibilities for public engagement, such as those with frontline roles 
in divisional offices, are likely to be the first point of contact for most complaints received 
by the AEC.  It is especially important that these staff fully understand and comply with the 
Policy and Procedures.   

Page 6    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 8 ---

State/territory Managers and Assistant Commissioners 
State/territory managers and Assistant Commissioners are responsible for ensuring that 
their staff undertake complaint management in compliance with the Framework, Policy 
and Procedures, and for providing management support within their workplaces.   

Assistant Commissioner, Education and Communications 
The Assistant Commissioner, Education and Communications, is responsible for the 
Complaints Management Framework, which includes establishing and monitoring of the 
Policy, Procedures, other supporting documents and the system for recording and 
managing complaints, the Public Engagement Contact Tool. The Assistant Commissioner, 

Education and Communications is also the internal central contact for the receipt and 
escalation of internal review requests. 

Public Engagement Contact Tool 
The Public Engagement Contact Tool (the Tool) is the national system that supports the 
management of enquiries, complaints and feedback to the AEC.   

Every complaint received by the AEC must be recorded in the Public Engagement 
Contact Tool.  This includes less complex complaints that are resolved at first point of 
contact. 

facilitating the efficient resolution of complaints 

improving communication in complaint management 

Recording all complaints in the Tool provides organisational benefits including:  
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

providing information to monitor performance in managing complaints 

providing information to review organisational performance 

supporting staff in their engagement with complainants 

providing information on trends and issues that can lead to business improvements. 

The Tool is also the mechanism to escalate complaints to other staff and business areas 
for their response.  A reference guide is available which provides instructions on how to 
record and manage a complaint in the Tool.  

Record keeping 
Staff must understand their recordkeeping obligations and responsibilities and adhere to 
the AEC’s recordkeeping policy and supporting procedures in the management of 
complaints.  

The record of a complaint in the Tool should include as attachments, all key 
correspondence that relates to the complaint. If there are any confidentiality or privacy 
issues with a complaint, identifying information should not be entered into or attached to 
the tool, but a file reference made to where it is kept. 

Page 7    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 9 ---

In addition to the online Tool, it is expected that each state/territory and branch office will 
maintain consolidated files in relation to their complaint management.  

Supporting resources 
These procedures should be read alongside: 
• 
• 

AEC Complaints Management Policy 

AEC Service Charter 

Engaging with Stakeholders at the AEC – A Best Practice Guide 

Further information on public enquiries and client contact is available on the AEC intranet: 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Managing Public Enquiries and Dealing with Difficult People  

List of recommended national office contact referral points for complaints (at 
attachment b) 

Public Enquiries intranet page 

Page 8    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 10 ---

Complaints Management 

Definition of a complaint 
A complaint is where an individual or organisation has expressed dissatisfaction to the 
AEC in relation to an AEC service, process or program, or where it is viewed the AEC has 
not met its expected quality of service.     

Complaints are one form of contact that the AEC has with the public and stakeholders 
through its external engagement channels.  The vast majority of contact is in the form of 
an enquiry which is defined as a request for information or service, or the provision of 
feedback such as a suggestion or compliment.  These must be managed in compliance 
with the information on the Public Enquiries and client contact intranet page.  

Types of complaints 
The Policy defines complaints into the broad categories – general nature, legal nature, 
regarding electoral fraud, breach of privacy, Public Interest Disclosure and those that are 
outside AEC responsibilities.  

Principles for complaints management 
The Policy outlines six principles – accessibility, responsiveness, confidentiality, fairness, 
transparency and efficiency – that are fundamental to an effective complaints 
management process.  It is important that you understand and follow these principles 
when managing complaints. 

First point of contact resolution 
Wherever possible, complaints should be resolved at the first point of contact.  This 
means that the complaint is resolved by the person who initially receives the complaint 
and often at the same time the complaint is received.  

Complaint management service standards 

Acknowledgment 
A complaint must be acknowledged within three working days of its receipt by the AEC.  

During electoral event periods, acknowledging an election-related complaint must be 
given priority. 

Response 
A complainant should be provided with a response within ten working days of its receipt, 
unless they have been specifically informed the investigation will take longer.  

Page 9    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 11 ---

During electoral event periods, an election-related complaint must be given priority and 
resolved as soon as possible after its receipt. 

If a complaint is found to be more complex than originally expected and advised, a 
complainant must be advised of a revised timeframe for response as soon as 
practicable. 

Page 10    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 12 ---




--- Page 13 ---

Extra assistance is available for: 
•  people who are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment who can contact the AEC 

through the National Relay Service  

•  people who would prefer to contact the AEC in a language other than English who can 

contact the AEC through the telephone interpreter service. 

The AEC may also be able to provide other assistance to a complainant to assist them in 
the complaints process, on request.  You should work with the complainant to ensure that 
they are adequately, and reasonably, supported during the complaints management 
process. 

Complaints of a serious or complex nature lodged in person or phone 
If a complaint is received in person or over the phone, and it is apparent that it is of a 
complex or serious nature, you should request that the complainant lodges their complaint 
in writing, wherever possible. 

If it is not possible for a complainant to lodge their complaint in writing, it is critical that you 
promptly record all details of the complaint, along with the contact details of the 
complainant in the Tool.   

Complaints lodged anonymously or using a pseudonym 
The Policy outlines the right for complainants to lodge their complaint anonymously or 
using a pseudonym.   

Complaints lodged anonymously are to be managed, as far as possible, in line with the 
Policy and these Procedures, however, if relevant information is not provided, and there is 
no other reasonable way to gain it, there may be limitations to the process.  

Complaints lodged indicating ‘no further contact’ 
The Policy outlines the option for complainants to specify whether they wish to be 
contacted regarding the complaint. If a complainant indicates that they do not wish to be 
contacted, the complaint is to be investigated but no acknowledgment or response is 
provided to the complainant.  

Complaints which do not fall within AEC responsibility 
If it is clear that the nature of the complaint relates to matters outside the AEC’s area of 
responsibility, you should inform the complainant that the complaint cannot be managed 
by the AEC.  In such cases, wherever possible, you should provide the details of an 
appropriate organisation to which the complainant can refer their complaint.  

Managing difficult behaviour at lodgement 
If a complaint is lodged with aggressive or rude behaviour or language, you are supported 
in communicating to complainants that their behaviour is not tolerated in our workplace.  

Page 12    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 14 ---




--- Page 15 ---




--- Page 16 ---




--- Page 17 ---




--- Page 18 ---

If you are unsure you should consult with your manager.  Alternatively, you can 
contact the specialist business area above, by phone, and discuss with them the 
complaint that you have received. 

Once a fraud/privacy/Public Interest Disclosure/legal request has been escalated to the 
relevant area, you are no longer responsible for management of the complaint. 

The relevant area will be responsible for entering the complaint into the Tool. 

Escalating general complaints 

ii) 
If the complaint is a general complaint then you are to record the details of the complaint 
in the Tool, and attach copies of related correspondence. This will assign the complaint 
with a unique identification number which is to be used in any further correspondence with 
the complainant. 

You are then to use the Tool to escalate the complaint, by assigning the complaint to a 
selected staff member or business area. 

A list of contact points for escalating complaints, such as the Roll Management Helpdesk 
or Funding and Disclosure Helpdesk is available.  When available, the generic contact 
point for the business area that the complaint relates to is the preferred referral point.   

If a generic contact point or specific staff member, based on their job title, cannot be 
identified, you should consult with your manager to determine who the complaint should 
be escalated to.  

If a complaint has been assessed as high in terms of risk, complexity, urgency or 
seriousness, once you have escalated it via the Tool you should also phone the relevant 
staff member/business area to draw their attention to it.   

If there are any confidentiality or privacy issues with a complaint, identifying information 
should not be entered into or attached to the tool, but provided separately to the 
escalation point. 

Once the complaint has been escalated you are no longer responsible for the 
management of the complaint. 

Receiving an escalated complaint 
If you have been escalated a complaint to manage via the Tool, you will receive advice via 
an email.  You are now responsible for conducting the management of the complaint from 
step four ‘Acknowledgement’. 

It is also suggested that you revisit the assessment of the complaint against the factors 
outlined in step two ‘Assessment’ on page 14. 

Page 17    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 19 ---




--- Page 20 ---




--- Page 21 ---




--- Page 22 ---

receive it before you provide any response to the complainant.  If you are not sure 
whether any approval is needed, you should consult with your manager. 

If a complaint has been assessed as high in terms of risk, complexity or seriousness the 

state/territory manager or Assistant Commissioner must provide approval for the 
response. You must also comply with any localised approval arrangements in place. 

Content of the response 
Once you have approval for your response you should advise the complainant as soon as 
practicable.  In your response you should include: 

• 
• 

• 

• 
• 

a clear statement of the AEC’s decision in response to the complaint 

an explanation of the investigation undertaken including reference to any relevant 
legislation or policy 

an explanation of any corresponding action that we may be taking (for example, 

amending a process or updating information on our website)  

an apology, if there has been any AEC mistake or misunderstanding, and 

the internal review process available to them if they are dissatisfied with the process 
used to investigate their complaint, or with our response to their complaint. 

Complaint response templates 
The complaint response templates must be used when providing a response to a 
complaint.  

If the complainant has requested that they not be contacted regarding the outcome of their 
complaint then do not provide them with a response. 

Channel of response 
When responding to a complaint, generally you should provide the response in the 
channel that the complaint was received.  For example, if the complaint was received via 
email you should provide the response by return email.   

However, there may be some cases when specific consideration is needed to determine 
whether using the same channel is appropriate to provide the response.  This is 
particularly the case for more complex complaints that are received over the phone, via 
social media, or in person. 

Timeframe for response 
A complainant should be provided with a response within ten working days of its receipt, 
unless they have been specifically informed the investigation will take longer.  

During electoral event periods, an election-related complaint must be given priority and 
resolved as soon as possible after its receipt. 

Page 21    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 23 ---

If a complaint is found to be more complex than originally expected and advised, a 
complainant must be advised of a revised timeframe for response as soon as 
practicable. A template response is available. 

Recording in the Public Engagement Contact Tool 
After the response has been provided to the complainant, details of the investigation 
undertaken and the response provided must be entered and/or attached to the complaint 

record in the Tool.   

If there are any confidentiality or privacy issues with a complaint, identifying information 
should not be entered into or attached to the tool, but a file reference made to where it is 
kept. 

Where a written response is not provided, it is important to record the response given over 
the phone or in person in the Tool.  You should also include detail as to whether the 
complainant appeared satisfied with the response provided. 

In addition to recording the details in the Tool, staff must understand their recordkeeping 
obligations and responsibilities and adhere to the recordkeeping policy and supporting 
procedures. It is expected that each state/territory and branch office will maintain 
consolidated files in relation to their complaint management.  

Page 22    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 24 ---

An overview of the complaints management process 

Page 23    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 25 ---




--- Page 26 ---




--- Page 27 ---

Extra support available to assist lodgement 
You should make any complainant who may require particular assistance aware that there 
is extra assistance available to support them. This is part of the AEC’s commitment to 
having an accessible complaint management process. 

Extra assistance is available for: 

•  People who are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment who can contact the 

AEC through the National Relay Service  

•  People who would prefer to contact the AEC in a language other than English who 

can contact the AEC through the telephone interpreter service. 

The AEC may also be able to provide other assistance to a complainant to assist them in 
the complaints process, on request.  You should work with the complainant to ensure that 
they are adequately, and reasonably, supported during the complaints management 
process. 

Requests for an internal review lodged anonymously or using a 
pseudonym 
The Policy outlines a complainant’s right to lodge a request for an internal review 
anonymously or using a pseudonym.  A request for an internal review lodged 
anonymously is still to be escalated.   

Request for an internal review lodged with no contact details 
The Policy requests complainants to provide contact details. If a complainant does not 
provide any/sufficient contact details, the request for an internal review is still to be 
escalated.  

Request for an internal review lodged indicating ‘no further contact’ 
The Policy outlines the option for complainants to specify whether they wish to be 
contacted regarding their request for an internal review. If a complainant indicates they do 
not wish to be contacted, the request for an internal review is still to be escalated. 

Escalating a request for an internal review 
If you receive a request for an internal review, you must escalate it to the Assistant 
Commissioner, Education and Communications via the Tool. 

This escalation should occur immediately, but as soon as possible on the same 
working day, of receiving a request for an internal review. 

When escalating the request, you should include as much detail as possible in the Tool, 
including specifically stating that the complainant has requested an internal review, and 
the time and date that they requested it.   

Page 26    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 28 ---

Any supporting documentation to accompany the request, such as an email exchange 
between the complainant and the AEC, or a letter from the complainant, must be scanned 
and attached to the entry in the Tool. 

If you believe that the complainant has not provided sufficient information for the AEC to 
undertake an internal review, you must still escalate the request.  You should not seek 
further information yourself.  When the request is assigned to staff to undertake the 
review, if there is not sufficient information then they will seek it themselves. 

If you assess the request as high in terms of risk, complexity, urgency or seriousness, 
once you have escalated it via the Tool you should contact the Assistant Commissioner, 
Education and Communications to draw their attention to it. 

If there are any confidentiality or privacy issues with a complaint, identifying information 
should not be entered into or attached to the Tool, but should be provided separately to 
the Assistant Commissioner, Education and Communications. 

Whilst you may be called upon to assist during the internal review process, once a request 
for an internal review has been escalated to the Assistant Commissioner, Education and 

Communications, you are no longer responsible for the review. 

Page 27    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 29 ---

External Review 

Whilst we recommend that complainants use the AEC internal review process in the first 
instance, all complainants have the right to seek an external review if they are dissatisfied 
with the process used to investigate their complaint or with our response, or if they remain 
dissatisfied following the conduct of a review.  

The conduct of any external review will be undertaken according to the policy and 
procedures of the relevant organisation or body. The Policy outlines some options for 
external review, and the AEC’s responsibility to cooperate with legal requirements of any 
external review.  

General advice, such as the options available for external review, may be provided to 
complainants seeking an external review, however, you are not to enter into any 
discussion about whether any external body will accept a request for a review or what the 
possible response could be from any external review process.    

Page 28    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 30 ---

Reporting arrangements 

Properly managing complaints is not just about dealing with and resolving individual 
complaints but it is also important in helping to deliver AEC services and to evaluate and 
make continuous improvement in the delivery. 

Monitoring performance   
The Policy outlines the AEC’s commitment to monitoring our performance in managing 
complaints against the set service standards. This will be achieved by: 

Regular review of complaints management data 
The complaints information in the Tool is subject to ongoing review by all business areas 
with regard to the content of complaints but also AEC staff performance in meeting the set 
service standards. The Public Engagement Team in NO Education and Communications 
Branch will provide oversight for this through the reporting arrangements outlined below, 
but all managers are independently required to establish regular mechanism to monitor 
performance in their business area.  

Sampling of complainants 
The AEC will also at least once in each calendar year contact a sample of complainants to 
seek their external feedback on how we managed their complaint. Complainants who 
make a complaint via the complaints form on our website are advised that the AEC may 
contact them for feedback about how we managed their complaint.  At this time, 
complainants who make a complaint via post, phone, social media or in person will not 
form part of this feedback.     

Non-election complaints reporting arrangements  
The reporting listed below is coordinated by the Public Engagement Team but requires 
the assistance of all staff through the consistent and accurate recording of complaints 
data in the Tool, and the assistance of other NO areas that manage specialist types of 

complaints.  

These arrangements will be reviewed in its first year of operation, and any changes will be 
updated in the Procedures. 

Quantitative monthly reports 
A monthly report on the number of complaints recorded in the Tool will be provided to 
Assistant Commissioner Education and Communications.  

This report will provide for each month: 
• 
• 

the overall number of complaints recorded in the Tool 

breakdown by complaint categories, channels for receipt, state/territory  

Page 29    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 31 ---

• 
• 

comparison of overall number to previous months 

detection of any key recurring issues.   

Following the identification of a key issue, the Assistant Commissioner Education and 
Communications will provide the report to the relevant state/territory managers or NO 
branch manager with responsibility for the business area the issue relates to. 

Consolidated quarterly reports 
A quarterly report on complaints management over the previous quarter will be provided 
to the Operational Compliance Group. This report will provide for that quarter: 
• 

the overall number of complaints recorded in the Tool, consolidated with complaints 
recorded in the Legal register 

• 
• 
• 
• 

breakdown by complaint categories, channels for receipt,  state/territory  

comparison of overall number to previous quarter 

feedback from the sampling of complainants feedback (if undertaken in the quarter) 

detection of any key recurring issues. 

Annual reporting 
A consolidated financial year report will be provided to meet the legislative requirement to 
report on complaint management within each financial year within the agency’s annual 
report.  

Electoral event complaints reporting arrangements  
During an electoral event, the reporting of public complaints will be integrated into the 
Election dashboard and closely monitored by the Public Engagement Team. The number 
and nature of complaints will also be integrated into the post-event evaluations and 

incorporated in Public Engagement Team Quarterly reporting. 

Business improvements 

Identification of business improvements 
The provision of the complaints reporting provides an accurate and regular mechanism for 
the analysis of complaints data. This will assist the AEC to detect any systemic issues, to 
actively inform service delivery and identify potential business improvements. The 
responsibility for the analysis and implementation of improvements lies with the relevant 
business area. 

Internal communications 
Key examples of the input of complaints data into identifying business improvements will 
be highlighted to AEC staff through intranet news features. 

Page 30    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 32 ---

Attachment A  

Template acknowledgement and response documents 

1.  Complaint acknowledgement  

To be used when a complaint has not been resolved at first point of contact and the 
resolution of the complaint will take longer than three days 

1a. 
1b. 
1c. 

Acknowledgment by letter 
Acknowledgment by email 
Key messages for acknowledgment by phone/person 

2.  Advice of delay in provision of response  

To be used when a complaint acknowledgement has been provided but the resolution will 
take longer than initially advised. 

2a. 
2b. 
2c. 

Advice by letter 
Advice by email 
Key messages for advice by phone/in person 

3.  Advice of seeking further information to investigate a complaint 

To be used when a complaint is made but the issue or facts of the complaint are not able 
to be determined. 

3a. 
3b. 
3c. 

Advice by letter 
Advice by email 
Key messages for advice by phone/in person 

4.  Advice of no investigation and further contact  

To be used when a complaint has been made but the issue or facts of the complaint are 
not able to be determined and no further clarification information is provided following 
contact with the complainant. 

4a. 
4b. 
4c. 

Advice by letter 
Advice by email 
Key messages for advice by phone/in person 

5.  Response to complaint  

To be used in responding to all complaints. This does not have to be used for complaints 
resolved at first point of contact. 

5a. 
5b. 
5c. 

Response by letter 
Response by email 
Script for response by phone 

Page 31    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 33 ---

1. 

Complaint acknowledgement templates 

1a. Acknowledgement by letter 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

Thank you for bringing your concerns to the attention of the Australian Electoral 
Commission in your complaint dated [date]. 

I am examining the issue/s you have raised and will provide you with a response within 10 
working days. [NB - this is the service standard, but adjust down accordingly]  

Please find enclosed a copy of the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy. This policy 
explains how I will manage your complaint as well as your rights and responsibilities as a 
complainant.  

In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 

[Name] 
[Title] 
[Address] 
[Email] 
[Phone] 

1b. Acknowledgement by email 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

Thank you for bringing your concerns to the attention of the Australian Electoral 
Commission in your complaint emailed on [date]. 

I am examining the issue/s you have raised and will provide you with a response within 10 
working days. [NB - this is the service standard, but adjust down accordingly] 

Please find a link to the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy on our website. This policy 
explains how I will manage your complaint as well as your rights and responsibilities as a 
complainant.  

In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 
[signature block] 

Page 32    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 34 ---

1c. Acknowledgement by phone/person 

These are key messages to cover: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Thank you for bringing your concerns to attention of the Australian Electoral 

Commission. 

I have logged your complaint into our system and assigned it with a unique 
reference number which you are welcome to record, for your reference – [number]. 

I will exam the issue/s you have raised and will provide you with a response 
within 10 working days [NB - this is the service standard, but adjust down 
accordingly] 

We have a formal Complaints Management Policy, which explains how I will 
manage your complaint as well as your rights and responsibilities as a 
complainant.  The policy is available to view on our website or alternatively I can 
post or email you a copy. 

In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me 

on [email], [phone]. 

Page 33    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 35 ---

2. 

Advice of delay in provision of response  

2a. 

Advice by letter 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am writing to update you on the progress of your complaint of [date] which I previously 
wrote to you on [date].  

My investigation into the concerns you raised is taking longer than I initially advised and I 
will now provide you with a response by [insert new anticipated response date]. 

I apologise for the delay. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Yours sincerely 

[Name] 
[Title] 
[Address] 
[Email] 
[Phone] 

2b. Advice by email 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am emailing to update you on the progress of your complaint of [date] which I previously 
emailed you on [date].  

My investigation into the concerns you raised is taking longer than initially advised and I 
will now provide you with a response by [insert new anticipated response date]. 

I apologise for the delay.  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Yours sincerely 

[signature block] 

Page 34    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 36 ---

2c. 

Advice by phone/in person 

These are key messages to cover: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

I am calling with regards to the complaint that you made on [date]. 

Unfortunately, my investigation into your concerns has taken longer than initially 

anticipated and I will not be able to provide you with a response by [insert previous 
date] as previously advised.   

I now will provide you with a response by [insert new anticipated response time].     

As I mentioned previously, we have a formal Complaints Management Policy, which 
explains how I will manage your complaint as well as your rights and responsibilities 
as a complainant.  The policy is available from our website or alternatively, I can 
post or email you a copy if you wish. 

In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me on 
[email], [phone]. 

Page 35    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 37 ---

3. 

Seeking further information to investigate a complaint 

3a. Advice by letter 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am writing in response to your complaint of [date].  

Unfortunately I am unable to ascertain the nature of your complaint from the information 
that you provided.  

In order for me to investigate your complaint further, I would appreciate if you could 
provide some additional information about the issues that you would like the Australian 
Electoral Commission (AEC) to investigate and the resolution that you are seeking from 
the AEC. (Consider if you can adjust this to specify what information you require)  

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 

[Name] 
[Title] 
[Address] 
[Email] 
[Phone] 

3b. 

Advice by email 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am emailing in response to your complaint of [date].  

Unfortunately I am unable to ascertain the nature of your complaint from the information 
that you provided.  

In order for me to investigate your complaint further, I would appreciate if you could 
provide some additional information about the issues that you would like the Australian 
Electoral Commission (AEC) to investigate and the resolution that you are seeking from 
the AEC. (Consider if you can adjust this to specify what information you require) 

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 

[signature block] 

Page 36    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 38 ---

3c. 

Advice by phone/in person 

These are key messages to cover: 

• 

• 

• 

I am calling in response to your email/letter/phone call/complaint of [date].  

Unfortunately, I am unable to determine the nature of your complaint from the 
information provided. 

So I can investigate your complaint further, I would appreciate if you could explain 
to me a little bit more about the issues that you are seeking the AEC to look into. 

[In the case that the complaint is complex in nature]: 
• 

Thank you for providing that further explanation. Is there any chance that you 
would be able to provide that information in writing to me at [select the option most 
appropriate – email/letter/online form]. 

[In the case that the sufficient information has been provided]: 

•  Thank you for providing that information. I  will now exam the issue/s you have 

raised and will provide you with a response  within 10 working days[NB - this is the 
service standard, but adjust down accordingly]  

• 

I have logged your complaint into our system and assigned it with a unique 

reference number which you are welcome to record, for your reference – [number]. 

•  We have a formal Complaints Management Policy, which explains how I will 
manage your complaint as well as your rights and responsibilities as a 
complainant, which is available to view on our website.  Alternatively, I can post or 
email you a copy. 

• 

In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me 
on [email], [phone]. 

[In the case sufficient information has NOT been provided]: 

•  Unfortunately I am still not clear about the issue that wish to raise with the AEC 

and so I am unable to look into this any further.  

• 

 May I suggest that if you do get additional information that you call me again or 

provide it in writing via the complaints form on the AEC website. 

Page 37    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 39 ---

4. 

Advice of no investigation and further contact  

4a. Advice by letter 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am writing in response to your complaint of [date], which I previously wrote to you on 
[date] seeking further information which was required to investigate the complaint.  

Thank you for responding to me on [date] but unfortunately I am still not able to ascertain 
the issue/s you are raising with the Australian Electoral Commission, and as such am not 
able to take any further action on this matter. 

Please find enclosed a copy of the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy. The policy 
details the information to provide when making a complaint and the process the AEC 
undertakes to investigate a complaint.     

Yours sincerely 

[Name] 
[Title] 
[Address] 
[Email] 

[Phone] 

4b. Advice by email 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am emailing in response to your complaint of [date], which I previously emailed you on 
[date] seeking further information which was required to investigate the complaint.  

Thank you for responding to me on [date] but unfortunately I am still not able to ascertain 
the issue/s you are raising with the Australian Electoral Commission, and as such am not 
able to take any further action on this matter. 

Please find a link to the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy on our website. The policy 
details the information to provide when making a complaint and the process the AEC 
undertakes to investigate a complaint.     

[signature block] 

4c. Phone/person 
Refer to 3c. message under: [In the case sufficient information has NOT been provided]: 

Page 38    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 40 ---

5. 

Complaint response templates 

5a. 

Response by letter 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am writing in response to your complaint of [date] concerning [insert your understanding 
of the issues of concern, using a bulleted or numbered list if there is more than one point]. 

I have investigated the points that you raised and [insert]: 
• 
• 

a clear statement of the AEC’s decision,  

an explanation of the investigation undertaken including reference to any relevant law 
or policy,  

• 
• 

an explanation of any corresponding action that we may be taking, and 

an apology, if there has been any AEC mistake or misunderstanding]. 

Please find enclosed a copy of the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy. This policy 
explains the process I undertook in investigating your complaint and explains some of the 
review processes available to you. 

If you have any questions about my response, or if I can be of any further assistance, 
please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 

[Name] 
[Title] 
[Address] 
[Email] 
[Phone] 

5b. 

Response by email 

Dear [Name] 

Reference number: [Insert] 

I am emailing in response to your complaint of [date] concerning [insert your 
understanding of the issues of concern, using a bulleted or numbered list if there is more 
than one point]. 

I have investigated the points that you raised and [insert response including: 
• 

a clear statement of the AEC’s decision,  

Page 39    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 41 ---

• 

• 
• 

an explanation of the investigation undertaken including reference to any relevant law 
or policy,  

an explanation of any corresponding action that we may be taking, 

and an apology, if there has been any AEC mistake or misunderstanding]. 

Please find attached a copy of the AEC’s Complaints Management Policy. This policy 
explains the process I undertook in investigating your complaint and explains some of the 
review processes available to you. 

If you have any questions about my response, or if I can be of any further assistance, 

please do not hesitate to contact me.  

Yours sincerely 

[signature block] 

5c. 

Response by phone 

These are key messages to cover: 

• 

• 

• 

I am calling with regards to the complaint that you made regarding [state your 

understanding of the issues of concern].   

I have investigated the points that you raised and as a result the AEC will [insert 
what is the AEC’s decision and an explanation of any action that we may be 
taking]  

As I mentioned previously, we have a Complaints Management Policy, which 
explains the process I undertook in investigating your complaint. 

[In the case of any AEC mistake or misunderstanding]. 
• 

I also apologise for the inconvenience that this has caused you. 

 [In the case that the complainants is not satisfied with the response]  
• 

I would like to further explain to you why this is the decision that the AEC has 

taken.    

[In the case that the complainants remains not satisfied with the response]  
• 

If you feel that I have not resolved the issues that you raised, the policy also 
outlines review options that may be available to you.   

• 

The Policy is available from our website or alternatively, I can post or email you a 
copy if you wish. 

Page 40    Complaints Management Procedures | 2015


--- Page 42 ---

The document, "Complaints Management Procedures" (February 2015), details the Australian Electoral Commission's (AEC) overarching framework and procedural guidelines for managing all external complaints received. It defines various complaint types, including "breach of privacy," and outlines a six-step process from receipt and assessment to investigation and response. The procedures specify that privacy complaints are to be escalated to "relevant business areas" and are managed in compliance with this general framework alongside "specific AEC policies and procedures" dedicated to privacy complaints. The document also describes the use of a "Public Engagement Contact Tool" for recording all complaints and mentions record-keeping obligations, including handling confidentiality and privacy issues by noting file references rather than directly attaching sensitive information.

Relevance to FOI Request (LEX3422):

This document is relevant to the FOI request's search for "policies for privacy complaints" as it outlines the general procedural handling for all external complaints, explicitly categorising and providing escalation pathways for "breach of privacy" complaints. It clarifies that while these procedures apply, specific, specialised policies govern the detailed management of privacy complaints, implying their existence.

However, the document does not contain information regarding:
* Online electoral roll management and disclosure.
* Detection or prevention of unlawful disclosures concerning the electoral roll.
* Measures for suspicious access detection.
* Specific electoral roll access data from IP addresses.

AI Generated

AEC FOI Disclosure Log Archive

FOI Request LEX3422

Summary of FOI Request Documents

Documents from the FOI Request

Main Content from Provided Documents that Relates to the FOI Request

FOI Request LEX3422, Schedule of Released Documents [PDF 105KB] (pdf)

LEX3422 documents [ZIP 1.6MB] (zip)

ZIP Contents

8. Complaints Management Procedures.pdf (pdf)