Victorian Universities Accused of FOI Abuse: Misusing Laws to Hide Salaries and Contracts

In recent months, accusations have surfaced that Victorian universities are systematically misusing Freedom of Information (FOI) laws to shield sensitive details about their operations from public scrutiny. The Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), a cornerstone of transparency in Victoria, Australia, grants the public the right to access documents held by government agencies, including public universities. These institutions, funded largely by taxpayer dollars, manage multi-billion-dollar budgets and play a pivotal role in higher education. Yet, claims from the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) suggest a pattern of delays, excessive redactions, and outright refusals that undermine this democratic tool.

The controversy erupted prominently in early 2026 when NTEU, alongside Victorian Greens MP Aiv Puglielli, released findings from FOI requests lodged two years prior. Targeting all eight public universities in Victoria—University of Melbourne, Monash University, RMIT University, Deakin University, La Trobe University, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria University, and Federation University Australia—the requests sought documents on executive salaries and commercial contracts, particularly those linked to fossil fuel companies and defence contractors. What followed was a saga of protracted responses, highlighting deep tensions between institutional secrecy and public accountability.

Understanding Freedom of Information Laws in Victorian Higher Education

The FOI Act mandates that agencies, including universities as public bodies, respond to requests within 30 days, with provisions for extensions only in exceptional cases. Applicants can appeal refusals to the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner (OVIC), which reviews decisions for compliance with public interest tests. In practice, however, universities leverage broad exemptions—such as personal privacy, commercial confidentiality, and unreasonable resource diversion—to withhold information.

Step-by-step, the FOI process unfolds as follows: First, a written request specifies documents sought. The agency acknowledges receipt and may consult third parties. It then decides on access, fees (search, retrieval, photocopying), and any exemptions. If denied, applicants pay fees to proceed or appeal. For Victorian universities, electronic databases should streamline searches, yet reports indicate otherwise. OVIC guidelines emphasize proactive disclosure, but uptake remains low.

This framework aims to foster openness in public institutions. Universities receive over $10 billion annually in government funding, educating 500,000 students and employing tens of thousands. Transparency ensures accountability for how these funds support executive pay, research partnerships, and strategic decisions.

The Core Accusations: A 'Rigged Game of Chess'

🧩 NTEU Victorian Assistant Secretary Professor Joo-Cheong Tham described the FOI experience as a 'rigged game of chess,' pointing to average response times of 216 days for salary-related requests and 127 days for contracts—far exceeding legal limits. Half the universities rejected applications outright, releasing heavily redacted documents where they complied. Tham criticized 'excessive fees and procedures' that 'bury' information, enabled by the Act's broad refusal grounds.

Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi echoed this, decrying a 'corporate university system' where vice-chancellors (VCs) claim exorbitant salaries amid staff cuts and student fee hikes. The dossier revealed universities' 'hostile attitude' toward transparency, endemic across the sector.

Specific Cases Spotlighting FOI Misuse

Deakin University exemplifies the disputes. OVIC overturned its withholding of senior executive and council remuneration details, ordering release. Deakin appealed to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), hiring external firm FOI Solutions—prompting NTEU questions on costs borne by public funds. Federation University initially blocked documents on research projects tied to fossil fuels, defence, and non-renewable energy but relented during OVIC review, citing public interest.

La Trobe and Swinburne had refusals upheld by OVIC on salaries and contracts, respectively. University of Melbourne and Monash, while not detailed in specific OVIC cases here, contributed to sector-wide delays. These instances illustrate tactical use of appeals to prolong non-disclosure.

• Deakin: Hired external lawyers for VCAT; OVIC ordered salary disclosures.
• Federation: Released fossil fuel links after OVIC intervention.
• La Trobe: Salaries protected under privacy exemptions.
• Swinburne: Contracts deemed commercially sensitive.

Executive Salaries: The Multi-Million Dollar Veil

At the heart lies executive remuneration. In 2024-2025, five Victorian VCs exceeded $1 million annually: Deakin's VC Iain Martin received over $1 million, including base salary of $706,801, superannuation $124,314, and performance bonuses. Monash's Sharon Lane topped lists at $1.34 million post-rise. Victoria University ($850,000) and Federation ($910,000) also hiked pay amid sector austerity.

FOI battles obscure full breakdowns, including incentives and consultant fees. A federal Senate inquiry last year recommended VC salary caps, noting averages surpassing $1 million—out of step with community expectations as universities cut courses and jobs. Recent ABC reporting links this to $1.8 billion in undisclosed external consultant spending.

Photo by Marcus Ganahl on Unsplash

Contracts with Fossil Fuels and Weapons: Ethical Concerns

Requests targeted ties to controversial sectors. Federation disclosed research funding from fossil fuel and defence firms after pushback. Broader scrutiny reveals Australian universities, including Victorian ones, accept millions from coal, gas, and arms companies for research. NTEU argues these partnerships contradict climate commitments, with FOI evasion hiding scope and financials.

For context, global divestment campaigns pressure unis, but Victoria's lag. OVIC's public interest balancing often favors disclosure, as in Federation's case, yet appeals persist. OVIC guidelines stress weighing transparency against commercial harm.

University Responses and Defences

Seven universities affirmed FOI compliance to ABC, citing privacy and public availability of some data. Deakin noted most info is online and plans VCAT appeal. Federation emphasized public interest in releases. Victoria University declined comment. Collectively, they decry misuse of FOI for 'fishing expeditions,' straining resources amid 500+ annual requests sector-wide.

Leaders argue competitive pressures necessitate confidentiality for talent retention and partnerships. However, critics counter that public funding demands openness.

Broader Governance and Transparency Crisis

This FOI row fits escalating scrutiny. Victorian and NSW inquiries probe governance post-federal Senate report, recommending salary caps and consultant curbs. Staff report 'hollowing out' via restructures by secretive consultants. Student groups demand divestment; unions push enterprise bargaining amid pay disparities.

Statistics: Victorian unis employ 50,000+ staff; international students contribute $5 billion yearly. Eroded trust risks enrolments, funding.

Impacts on Stakeholders and Public Trust

Staff face job insecurity while executives thrive; students question ethical alignments. Public trust dips—polls show declining confidence in higher ed. Delays cost applicants thousands in fees, deterring scrutiny. Long-term, weakened accountability hampers reforms on equity, sustainability.

Pathways to Reform: Solutions and Outlook

Solution-oriented steps include: stricter timelines, fee caps, mandatory pro-active disclosure of exec pay/contracts, OVIC resourcing boosts. Federal models like NSW's GIPA Act offer narrower exemptions. Universities could adopt voluntary transparency dashboards.

2026 inquiries may spur change; NTEU eyes legislative tweaks. Balanced reform preserves commercial viability while upholding FOI's intent. For academics eyeing Victoria, transparency signals institutional health—vital for career decisions.

Stakeholders urge dialogue: unis, unions, government. Proactive steps, like Deakin's partial disclosures, build bridges. Future: enhanced OVIC powers, digital FOI portals, could restore faith by 2027.

Photo by Mayer Tawfik on Unsplash

Real-World Implications for Higher Education Careers

For prospective lecturers, researchers, admins: FOI battles spotlight governance risks affecting job security, ethics. Victoria's 100,000+ higher ed roles demand vigilance. Positive: scrutiny drives better practices, potentially stabilizing sector amid global shifts.