Victorian health department ‘considering’ releasing secret briefings after fight for secrecy

The privacy watchdog has ordered the Andrews government to reveal the health advice that triggered lockdowns, but a minister has declined to say if those documents will be publicly released.

Senior government Minister Danny Pearson has confirmed the health department is actively considering whether to release the advice that plunged Victoria into lockdown in February.

But he refused to explicitly say whether the documents would definitively be released for Victorians to view.

He also refused to detail whether the release would be granted for all of Melbourne’s six lockdowns.

“These documents are not my documents,” he said.

“As I understand it, the Department of Health will consider this.”

When asked if he had physically seen the documents, Mr Pearson said: “I’m not the health minister.”

Mr Pearson shut down claims that Victoria had been too cautious in this pandemic response.

The privacy watchdog has ruled records of secret briefings used to justify sending Victoria into lockdown must be released in the public interest.

The state government has been ordered to hand over secret CHO briefs used to justify Victoria’s tough restrictions. Picture: Luis Enrique Ascui

In an explosive decision, the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner has ordered the release of more than 100 pages of the Department of Health briefings.

Those relate to the February lockdown, but the move may spark calls for the reasons for all six lockdowns to be revealed.

It will be the first time such sensitive briefing material has been made publicly available.

The Department of Health tried to block the release of the material, saying the files revealed “high-level deliberative processes of government” and risked jeopardising the trust between public officials and a minister.

It also argued releasing the material jeopardised the preparation of future briefings and ability of key decision-makers to implement appropriate health directions.

But Joanne Kumm­row, the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner’s public access deputy commissioner, disagreed and said releasing the material was in the public interest.

She said one key document contained important information about the way the Victorian government responded to Covid-19, including the rationale for public health orders.

“I consider there is significant public interest in providing members of the comm­unity the ability to part­icipate in such processes and to hold governments to ­account for the decisions it has made,” Ms Kummrow said.

“The documents describe the reasons for placing restrictions on the movements of members of the community, including in relation to sensitive matters, such as hospital visits. These decisions have a profound effect on the lives of Victorians.

“In these circumstances, members of the community have a right to access documents that describe the background information con­sidered, the reasons, the legal basis for, and documents that record those decisions.”

The Department of Health has 14 days to appeal against the decision.

It refused to release the documents to the state opposition under Freedom of Information laws, prompting an appeal to OVIC.

The decision not to release five documents was upheld because of legal privilege.

The leader of the opposition in the upper house, David Davis, who has been fighting for access to the documents, said Victorians deserved to know the reasons they had been locked down.

“The Andrews Labor government, through its health officers, has clamped down families, schoolkids and businesses on the basis of ‘health advice’,” he said.

“Yet it has never once released the formal written briefs relied on by the chief health officer or delegate. Why have they hidden this ­information?

“OVIC has ordered the release of briefings relating to the February lockdown. It’s time Daniel Andrews came clean and provided those documents in full.”

Mr Davis said the failure to release the advice would call into question the government’s credibility.

“These secret CHO briefs are meant to be based on scientific evidence,” he said.

“They are meant to be based on a proportional balancing of impacts and meant to be transparent and accountable under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act.

“The secrecy, the cover-up, the resistance by Labor in blocking the release of these documents is disgraceful. Businesses slammed shut and families blocked from seeing loved ones are entitled to see the reasons behind their lockdown in full.

“It’s a scandal that these documents have been kept secret all the way through the pandemic.”

A Department of Health spokesman said the department would “take the appropriate time to properly review OVIC’s decision before any further action is considered”.

In September, as a result of a Supreme Court challenge, the government was forced to release ­secret data relied on to extend Melbourne’s curfew.