In Santos' HQ there's a letter that it would appear they don't want anyone else to see, including ENB.

I don't know exactly what's in the letter but they're trying hard to stop us getting access to it.

Allow me to explain, and in doing so give you an idea of some of the ways and means of our journalistic endeavours.

Last October I spent a good few hours watching senate estimates online. During one hearing on 10 October the Greens Senator Steph Hodgins-May was questioning representatives from the Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) about the leaking tank at Santos' Darwin LNG plant, after the gas company had announced the previous month that their Barossa gas project was starting up.

During the exchange, assistant minister Anthony Chisholm, who was representing the government at the session, said: "I know that [resources minister Madeleine King has] written to Santos just to ensure that they are meeting their obligations in this regard."

Hodgins-May promptly asked that that letter was tabled in evidence to which Chisholm consented.

As most people will appreciate, the wheels of government turn slowly and ENB was advised Minister King's office would be expected to table that letter by 28 November.

However, keen to see the letter ASAP, a few days later ENB submitted a Freedom of Information request to DISR and the minister's office for a copy of the letter.

So far, so normal.

A couple of months later a letter dropped into ENB's inbox from King's chief of staff which said they had decided to grant ENB access to the letter but that "a third party has objected to releasing this document."

As a result of this intervention, a 30 day pause was introduced to the process to allow for the third party to lodge an appeal against King's office's decision with the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).

Content to let the parliamentary process play out, it was natural to assume that as Chisholm had promised to table the letter, this would happen in due course irrespective of the FOI process.

And yet, over the weeks and now months since that October senate estimates hearing, no letter has been tabled.

However, this week, ENB received confirmation of the identity of that third party.

A document sent from DISR on behalf of King's office to explain why no letter had been tabled, reads: "The document has also been requested under FOI. Santos has objected to the disclosure of the document and applied to the OAIC for review of the decision to release the document. Providing the document at this time would circumvent the decision before OAIC."

So, what is it that is in that letter that Santos really doesn't want ENB to see?

King and her team - and presumably DISR for that matter - don't mind ENB seeing this document. Maybe they would even like it to be in the public realm.

As former senator and now self-styled transparency warrior Rex Patrick commented, for a government which doesn't have a great track record with transparency, on this occasion they're being transparent and it's Santos that's trying to obfuscate.

"There is a cost to doing business with government and Santos has to be aware of that," he said.

ENB did ask Santos for a response as to why they are appealing the FOI but did not receive a response.

It's worth noting that even if ENB fails to convince the OAIC to over-rule Santos' appeal, King's office is still obliged to table the letter, based on Chisholm's previous assurances at estimates.

I wonder what lengths Santos might go to next to try to stop that happening.

Yours,

Russell Yeo

Editor Energy News Bulletin

---

To get the best analysis and insight of what's happening in APAC's energy sector, sign up for a free trial.