05 March 2026
4 min read
#Australian Government, #Data & Privacy
Published by:
The growing use of automated decision‑making (ADM) by Australian Government agencies is increasingly seen in service delivery contexts such as social services, migration, biosecurity and aged care. While ADM can enhance efficiency, transparency in its use is important for maintaining public trust and improving accountability, fairness and public confidence in the administrative law system.
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) has recently reviewed how transparent Australian Government agencies are regarding their use of ADM processes. Agencies authorised to use ADM should ensure they comply with the OAIC’s recommendations for publishing information about ADM on their websites.
Earlier this year, the OAIC published a report, ‘Automated decision‑making and public reporting under the Freedom of Information Act’, which assessed how information about ADM is communicated on the websites of Australian Government agencies authorised to use ADM under legislation. The report was developed to promote public awareness of the use of ADM and support commitments in the Commonwealth Integrity Strategy, including Outcome 3: Transparency and accountability of actions and decisions are improved, and Outcome 4: Public trust and confidence in the Commonwealth public sector are enhanced.
Australian Government websites play an important role in promoting transparency regarding ADM. According to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Automated Decision-making Better Practice Guide, websites are the primary channel through which agencies communicate with the public and publish information about their use of automated systems. Further, recommendation 17.1 of the Robodebt Royal Commission Report suggests that where ADM is implemented, agencies should publish information on departmental websites explaining that ADM is used and, in plain language, how the process works.
Part II of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) (FOI Act) establishes the Information Publication Scheme (IPS). The IPS requires agencies to publish both a plan for administering the scheme and a range of information about their functions, operations and decision‑making. This is designed to complement the request‑based access regime in Part III of the FOI Act and support the objects of the legislation, including that information held by government is a national resource to be managed for public purposes.
Under section 8(2)(c) of the FOI Act, agencies must publish, as far as practicable, details of their functions, including decision‑making powers and other powers that affect members of the public. In addition, section 8A of the FOI Act requires agencies to publish their operational information, such as the policies, rules and procedures relied on when making decisions or recommendations about the public.
In October 2025, the Information Commissioner conducted a desktop review of 23 Commonwealth agencies authorised by legislation to use ADM. The review examined what each agency discloses about ADM in its decision processes, primarily through its IPS pages and other public website content.
The OAIC found that:
Despite this, the OAIC identified several examples of good practice during the review, including:
The OAIC recommends that:
While the Digital Transformation Agency has established requirements for transparency statements regarding the use of AI, the OAIC’s recommendations apply across all types of ADM. The regulator has also indicated its intention to update the FOI guidelines to address ADM.
Transparency about ADM under FOI intersects with privacy obligations. The Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) includes new ADM transparency requirements scheduled to commence on 10 December 2026, obliging APP entities to disclose in their privacy policies when a computer program makes (or substantially shapes) decisions that significantly affect individuals, including the types of personal information and decisions involved.
Agencies should review their IPS ADM descriptions to ensure they are consistent with ADM disclosures made in privacy policies.
Given the increasing focus on transparency in ADM, agencies should review their IPS entry against the OAIC’s recommendations and guidelines. They should also consider adopting the examples of good practice identified by the regulator and ensure their disclosures in privacy policies align with IPS information.
If you have any questions about your agency’s ADM disclosure obligations, please contact us here. For further reading, see our previous article discussing key considerations for government agencies using AI.
Disclaimer
The information in this article is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this article is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.
Published by:
