ACT Government's Digital Records Overhaul Triggers Push to Purge Duplicate Images From Public Files

The ACT Government holds tens of thousands of duplicate digital images across its agency servers — and senior officials, data specialists and transparency advocates say the problem has quietly grown into something that is actively costing taxpayers money and slowing down information requests. A formal push to address the backlog is now underway, with the Digital, Data and Technology Solutions (DDTS) branch of the ACT Public Service flagging duplicate image replacement as a priority for the second half of 2026.

The issue has become more pressing because the ACT Government is mid-rollout of its whole-of-government Digital Records Management Strategy, a program that was supposed to consolidate fragmented document storage across agencies by mid-2026. That deadline slipped. Now agencies including Transport Canberra, the Planning Directorate, and ACT Health are sitting on overlapping digital asset libraries that contain — in some cases — four or five saved copies of the same planning photograph, site assessment image, or infrastructure file.

Why It Matters Beyond Filing Cabinets

The practical consequences are tangible. Freedom of Information officers at the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal precinct on London Circuit say duplicate records complicate disclosure decisions because each copy of an image may carry a different metadata trail, a different access classification, or sit within a different agency folder. That means FOI staff sometimes have to review and assess the same image multiple times under different file references — adding hours to requests that are already subject to the statutory 20-business-day response window under the Freedom of Information Act 2016 (ACT).

Data governance specialists at the Australian National University's 3A Institute in Acton have been consulted informally by at least two ACT directorates on the question of automated deduplication tools. The Institute's work on responsible data systems has made it a natural reference point for public service teams trying to modernise without introducing new risks. The key technical challenge, according to those familiar with the discussions, is that a straight file-hash comparison — the simplest deduplication method — will flag legitimately different images as duplicates if they have been resized or recompressed, which is common in planning and infrastructure records.

The Australian Information Commissioner's office, which handles complaints about federal agencies but whose guidance documents are widely read by ACT officials, published updated records management advice in March 2026. That advice specifically flagged image-heavy datasets as an emerging risk area for FOI compliance. ACT Archives, based on Parkes Place East in the Parliamentary Triangle, has since circulated that guidance internally to all ACT directorates.

Canberra's Growth Areas Are Part of the Problem

The issue is particularly acute in records tied to Gungahlin and Belconnen — the two growth corridors where development applications, environmental assessments and light rail stage 2 corridor planning have generated thousands of site photographs since 2022. The Planning Directorate's online development application portal, DA Finder, lists more than 6,400 active applications lodged in those two districts since January 2023. Each application can carry dozens of image attachments, and agencies acknowledge that images frequently migrate between systems during review stages, spawning duplicate entries.

Digital Records Manager positions across three ACT directorates are currently vacant, according to ACT Public Service Commission workforce data published in April 2026. Those gaps mean deduplication work that should be routine is being deferred. The DDTS branch has earmarked $340,000 in the 2026-27 agency budget for digital asset governance tools, a figure open-data advocates say is modest given the scale of the task.

For Canberrans who interact with government records — whether developers navigating the DA process on Gungahlin Town Centre projects, journalists filing FOI requests, or researchers at the University of Canberra's News and Media Research Centre in Bruce — the practical advice from information law specialists is consistent: if a document you receive under FOI appears to be a duplicate with a different reference number, that is worth flagging in a follow-up request. Agencies are obligated to confirm whether records are distinct or duplicated. The DDTS branch says its deduplication audit, covering the Planning Directorate and Transport Canberra first, is scheduled to report findings by October 2026.