Download original attachment
(PDF file)
This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Official Information request 'Request to amend the OIA'.

Justice Centre | 19 Aitken Street 
DX SX10088 | Wel ington 
T 04 918 8800 | F 04 918 8820 
[email address] | www.justice.govt.nz 
2 July 2020 
 
George Morrison 
[FYI request #12895 email] 
 
Our ref: OIA 82512 
 
Dear George 
 
Official Information Act request: Information on the Official Information Act 1982 
Thank you for your email of 26 May 2020 requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982  (OIA), 
information relating to the OIA. I want to reiterate the apologies of Jan Morison, Team Leader Ministerial 
Relations and Services, for the delay in responding to your request which was due to an administrative 
oversight. 
You specifically asked: “Please provide me with information held on the request made to the ombudsman 
to suspend/amend the OIA, including job titles of those who made the request (reference: 
https://fyi.org.nz/request/12695/response/48074/attach/html/4/0%201%20525207%204091677.pdf. 
html” 
The URL you have provided linked to a letter from the Office of the Ombudsman that outlined interactions 
between the Ombudsmen and officials at the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Internal Affairs and the 
Solicitor-General, as to whether there was a need under the Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006 (EPA) to make 
any temporary amendments to the OIA or the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 
1987 (LGOIMA). The letter noted: “No officials proposed the suspension of the OIA or the LGOIMA in its 
entirety.” 
In terms of your request, I can advise that in the week of 16 March 2020, the Ministry’s Policy Group began 
scanning the legislation it administers, in preparation for advising the Minister of Justice about the potential 
for any temporary modifications to legislation under section 5 of the EPA. 
The OIA is administered by the Ministry, so it fell within scope of this exercise. As a first step, a Justice 
official rang his counterpart at the State Services Commission to inform him that Justice was assessing the 
need for any temporary modifications to the OIA. On Friday 20 March, a Justice official contacted the Office 
of Ombudsman, inviting a discussion about whether there was a case for a modification order. On Monday 
23 March, the Chief Ombudsman responded. He noted that he had discussed the matter with the Solicitor-
General and advised that a modification order was not required. He stated that he would instead issue 
guidance to agencies about how to manage OIA requests over the lockdown period. 
There was then a follow up contact on 26 and 27 March between a Ministry official and the Solicitor-
General, about whether a temporary modification to the OIA should be considered, including whether there 
was any need to provide more flexibility for extensions to the statutory response timeframe. 

This correspondence is attached. Some information, including the correspondence with the Solicitor 
General, has been withheld under the fol owing sections of the OIA: 
•  section 9(2)(a) - privacy of natural persons, and; 
•  section 9(2)(h) – maintain legal or professional privilege. 
Regarding your request for the job title of the person who made the request to suspend or amend the OIA, 
as the correspondence demonstrates, and the letter from the Ombudsman has confirmed, no officials at 
the Ministry proposed the suspension of the OIA.  However, as the correspondence also shows, I was the 
responsible manager at the Ministry that led discussions with the Office of the Ombudsman on whether 
any temporary modifications to the OIA were required. The Ministry agreed with the Chief Ombudsman’s 
view that the OIA was sufficiently flexible that no modification was required  and we supported  his 
publication of guidance to agencies on how to manage requests during the lockdown period. 
 
I am satisfied there are no other public interest considerations that render it desirable to make the 
information withheld under section 9 available. 
If you require any further information, please contact Jerram Watts, Acting Team Leader, Media and 
External Relations, by calling (04) 918 8980; or emailing [email address] 
If you are not satisfied with my response, you have the right to complain to the Ombudsman under section 
28(3) of the Act. The Ombudsman may be contacted by email at [email address] 
 
Yours sincerely 
 
Caroline Greaney 
General Manager, Civil and Constitutional 
 
 
Encl: Appendix and released documents 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Doc # 
Date 
Description 
Status 
OIA section 
1 
23/03/2020 – 
Email correspondence: RE: Official Information Act 1982 administration during 
Withheld in ful   9(2)(h) 
27/03/2020 
COVID-19: our ref 523778 [CLO-Docs.SLG001.7.FID422494] 
2 
23/03/2020 – 
Email correspondence: RE_ FAQs_ Official Information 
Released in part  9(2)(a) 
16/04/2020 
Act 1982 administration during COVID-19_ 
our ref 523778 
3 
24/03/2020 
Email: Request: Assessment of legislation to advise whether s15 order under EPA 
Released in part  9(2)(a) 
required 
4 
28/04/2020 
Aide memoire: 20200428 AM – Official Information Act note to Minister 
Released in part  9(2)(h) 
Provided by the Ministry of Justice to the Minister of Justice to summarise Ministry 
communications with the Office of the Ombudsman and the Solicitor-General on 
how the OIA would operate during the COVID-19 Level 4 period. 
 
Document 2: RE_ FAQs_ Official Information
Act 1982 administration during COVID-19_
our ref 523778
From:
Kate Goodman
To:
Greaney, Caroline
Subject:
RE: FAQs: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Date:
Thursday, 16 April 2020 8:44:11 AM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image002.jpg
Hi Caroline
ACT 1982
The FAQs are now available on our website here. The PDF version is much nicer to look at and searchable,
so I would suggest that version.
We haven’t had any other feedback from agencies yet but we might get some in the coming days and
weeks as requests come to their due days during the lockdown period. I will keep you in the loop.
Thanks
Kate
From: Kate Goodman 
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2020 11:18 AM
To: 'Greaney, Caroline' <[email address]>
Subject: RE: FAQs: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
INFORMATION 
Hi Caroline
Thanks for this, really appreciate you getting back to me today. Agree that this could be a pretty regular
situation, especially if the lockdown extends. We’re working to get a consistent approach with Crown Law
at the moment so I’ll let you know if/when we achieve that!
Will do – we are frequently receiving updates from agencies so if anything major pops up that might
require guidance or a change to the Act we will let you know that ASAP too.
Thanks
Kate
From: Greaney, Caroline <Caroline [email address]> 
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2020 11:14 AM
To: Kate Goodman <[email address]>
Subject: RE: FAQs: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Kia ora Kate
Thanks for the opportunity to review the draft guidance.  In respect of the grounds for refusing requests
where the information cannot be accessed due to the need to go to the office, 18(c)(i) works well.
It would be reall  helpful if there could be alignment between the Crown Law guidance and your own on
this matter  We think this situation may  arise relatively frequently, and it will be important that agencies
take a consistent approach.
And on a slightly different, but related note - we’re still keeping an eye on whether any temporary
modification is needed to the Act over this period. We’d appreciate it if you could share any feedback you
receive about how agencies are meeting their OIA obligations and, in particular, whether any issues are
arising that (in their view) cannot be sufficiently addressed through guidance.
Very happy to discuss – please feel free to give me a call.
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
1

Nga manaakitanga
Caroline
Caroline Greaney 
General Manager, Civil & Constitutional
Policy Group 
s9(2)(a)
ACT 1982
Ministry of Justice | Tahu o te Ture 
P +64 4 918 8584 | Ext 58584 | 
[email address] | justice.govt.nz
From: Kate Goodman <[email address]> 
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2020 8:43 AM
To: Greaney, Caroline <[email address]>
Subject: RE: FAQs: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Hi Caroline
Forgot to include this in my last email – we’re not requiring a formal  onsultation’ on these, so no need to
put in heaps of effort/time, as I know that you’re really busy!
INFORMATION 
The only question that doesn’t have an established answer is the one that I pointed out, everything else is
very standard.
From: Kate Goodman 
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2020 8:38 AM
To: 'Greaney, Caroline' <Caroline.Greaney@justice govt.nz>
Subject: FAQs: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Good morning Caroline
The Ombudsman is looking to publish a set of frequently asked questions for agencies and requesters
covering requests for official information during COVID-19 (current version attached). They will be
published later today or early next week and we will be updating these as new issues arise or the situation
changes.
The FAQs don’t all relate to the operation of the OIA necessarily, they’re more concerned with practical
steps for agencies responding to requests during COVID-19. The answers themselves are mostly taken
from our already public guidance about the OIA/LGOIMA. However, there is one question (‘How should
we respond to a req est if the information requested is not accessible?’) where our answer differs from
the Solicitor-General’s advice. We have contacted the Solicitor-General and Crown Law about this and
also for general feedback.
Apologies for the short notice, if you have any feedback please let me know. As mentioned, we will be
updating these as things change if needed so if you have feedback please don’t hesitate, even if it isn’t
today
Happy to discuss.
Kind regards
Kate
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
2


Kate Goodman
Senior Advisor, Strategic Advice
Office of the Ombudsman | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata
ACT 1982
DDI 04 471 9110 | Phone 04 473 9533 | Fax 04 471 2254
Email [email address] | www.ombudsman.parliament.nz
PO Box 10152, Level 7, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace, Wellington
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It is
intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are not the
intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any information
contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy
the original message and any attachments.
INFORMATION 
From: Greaney, Caroline <[email address] nz> 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2020 3:29 PM
To: Kate Goodman <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Many thanks Kate! I know this will be very much appreciated.
Nga manaakitanga
Caroline
Caroline Greaney 
General Manager, Civil & Constitutional
Policy Group 
Ministry of Justice | Tahu o te Ture 
P +64 4 918 8584 | Ext 58584 |s9(2)(a)
[email address] | justice.govt.nz
From: Kate Goodman <[email address]> 
Sent: Tuesday  24 March 2020 3:21 PM
To: Greaney, Caroline <[email address]>
Subject: RE  Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
Hi Caroline
It went up almost immediately after I sent that email!
https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/news/chief-ombudsmans-statement-official-information-
response-times-during-covid-19-emergency
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
3
Thanks
Kate
 
From: Kate Goodman 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2020 3:12 PM
To: 'Greaney, Caroline' <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
ACT 1982
 
Hi Caroline
 
Apologies for the delay in coming back to you – we’ve all been busy setting up working from home!
 
Of course, I’ll let you know if I’m aware of any other discussions. The Ombudsman will be publishing his
formal statement to requestors/agencies this afternoon so I will send you through a  ink once it’s up.
 
Thanks
Kate
 
From: Greaney, Caroline <[email address]> 
Sent: Monday, 23 March 2020 3:42 PM
To: Kate Goodman <[email address]>
Cc: Alex Schröder <[email address]>; Bridget Hewson
INFORMATION 
<[email address]>
Subject: Re: Official Information Act 1982 administration during COVID-19: our ref 523778
 
Thanks Kate, very helpful. We would appreciate being in luded in discussions (even if it’s just on a FYI
basis), as the agency responsible for the OIA. Both our Minister and Chief Executive will be interested in
arrangements in relation to legislation we adm nister - as you can appreciate we are working through
similar questions on the operation of many pieces of legislation.
 
Happy to discuss at any point - please feel free to give me a call 
 
Kind regards
Caroline 
Sent from my iPhone
 
On 23/03/2020, at 3:35 PM, Kate Goodman <[email address]>
wrote:
Dear Caroline
 
Thank you for your time this morning.
 
The Chief Ombudsman has discussed with the Solicitor General the issue of a possible
recommendation for modifications of the Official Information Act 1982 under section 15 of
the Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006.
 
As a result he agrees with the Solicitor General that The OIA has sufficient flexible provisions
and mechanisms in place to allow agencies to manage requests during this difficult and
rapidly evolving time. The Chief Ombudsman will be looking to issue guidance to agencies
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
4
and requesters on the website to assist them. He will be doing this in consultation with the
Solicitor General.
Nga mihi
Kate Goodman
ACT 1982
Senior Advisor, Strategic Advice
Office of the Ombudsman | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata
DDI 04 471 9110 | Phone 04 473 9533 | Fax 04 471 2254
Email [email address] |
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz
PO Box 10152, Level 7, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace, Wellington
<image001.jpg>
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please
note that if you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or
INFORMATION 
distribute the email or any information contained in it. If you have received this email in
error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the original message and any
attachments.
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message.
Please note that if you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy
or distribute the email or any information contained in it. If you have received this
email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the original message
and any attachments.
Confidentiality notice: 
This email may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it
by mistake, please:
(1) reply promptly to that effect, and remove this email and the reply from your system;
(2) do not act on this emai  in any other way.
Thank you.
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It is
intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are not the
intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any information
contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy
the original message and any attachments.
Confidentiality notice: 
This email may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it
by mistake, please:
(1) reply promptly to that effect, and remove this email and the reply from your system;
(2) do not act on this email in any other way.
Thank you.
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
5
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It is
intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are not the
intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any information
contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy
the original message and any attachments.
ACT 1982
Confidentiality notice: 
This email may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it
by mistake, please:
(1) reply promptly to that effect, and remove this email and the reply from your system;
(2) do not act on this email in any other way.
Thank you.
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It
is intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are
not the intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any
information contained in it. If you have received this email in error  please advise the sender
immediately and destroy the original message and any attachments.
INFORMATION 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
6
Document 3: Request Assessment of legislation
to advise whether s15 order under EPA required
Washington, Brady
From:
McLean, Virginia
Sent:
Tuesday, 24 March 2020 4:48 PM
To:
DL-PG-Board; DL-PG-CHIEF ADVISORS; DL-PG-POLICY MANAGERS
Subject:
Request: Assessment of legislation to advise whether s15 order under EPA requiredACT 1982
Kia ora koutou 
Summary 
Each team to assess statutes they administer and advise, as soon as possible, any changes they think are necessary 
under the Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006 (EPA). Start with a rapid assessment, move onto priority statutes, then 
remaining statutes with restrictions or requirements.  Communicate to your GM and me the results of the rapid 
assessment by midday Thursday this week, and next Wednesday for the remaining statutes. 
Background 
The Prime Minister has made a s5 Order under the EPA, which unlocks the ability to do s15 orders.  S15 orders 
provide for changes to be made to restrictions or requirements in laws where it is impossible or impractical to 
comply with them, and it is reasonable necessary to make the changes.  
She has also issued a s8 Order with respect to the Social Security Act and Immigration Act.  Both orders are worth a 
INFORMATION 
read along with the EPA (s15 and more generally) to complete the tasks set out below. 
https://gazette.govt.nz/notice/id/2020‐go1368 
https://gazette.govt.nz/notice/id/2020‐go1369 
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/0085/latest/whole.html#contents 
Action required 
There are two broad tasks to complete: 
 Identify and prioritise statutes that need to be assessed.
 Assess and advise necessary modifications.
Below is a link to spreadsheet of Justice legislation, which indicates the team it is with and where the Epidemic 
Preparedness Act does not apply, as well as where legislation is jointly administered. 
X:\COVID‐19\Legislation review for s15 order\Legislative overview for section 15 order.xlsx 
To complete the first task  I suggested managers work with one or two SMEs in your teams to do a rapid assessment 
and identify any top‐of‐mind statutes that may need to be changed.  Please advise me and you GM of these statutes 
and provisions that may need amending by midday Thursday, so that we can potentially seek modification orders. 
This will involve working the Ministry of Health and the Minister’s office. 
For the other statutes, Jess and Sharlene suggest working through the attached decision tree to prioritise the 
statutes: 
X:\COVID‐19\Legislation review for s15 order\Decision tree for determining priority ‐ s15 work.docx 
Sharlene and Jess have also suggested criteria to use when considering the lower priority legislation: 
 Level of obligation (individual / organisation / Govt)
 Number impacted
1
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
7

 Significance of implications on the effected level
 Significance of flow‐on effects
And finally, FYI Sharlene has completed an example priority assessment: 
X:\COVID‐19\Legislation review for s15 order\Example decision tree for determining priority ‐ s15 work 
(alcohol).docx 
The trick is to not get too bogged down getting it perfect; the main thing is to identify any changes you think are 
ACT 1982
necessary as soon as you can. 
For each Unit and/or Team, please: 
 start your own excel sheet and work through the statutes that belong to your teams,
 complete the rapid assessment and advise the outcome of that work to your GM and me by midday
Thursday
 prioritise remaining statutes and assess
 assess the remaining set of statutes.
If you think you need to consult outside of government to complete the assessment, contact me and we will work 
together to prepare key messages so that they can be reviewed and used consistently.  If you need to consult across 
government, especially for jointly administered statutes, you can tap into your networks  
If you have any ideas to improve this process please do share – I can be the first point of call or you can work 
amongst yourselves and copy me in. 
INFORMATION 
Timeframe 
 Midday Thursday (26 March) – advise your GM and me the outcome of your rapid assessment
 COP Wednesday (1 April) – advise your GM and me of the outcome of your full assessment
Happy to discuss. 
Ginny 
Virginia McLean 
Chief Advisor, Policy Group 
s9(2)(a)
Part time – I work Monday‐Thursday 
2
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
8

Document 4: 20200428 AM - Official Information Act note to Minister
Epidemic Immeadiate Modification Orders and disussion 
about Official Information Act   
Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice 
28 April 2020 
Purpose 
1. This note sets out the discussions between the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the
ACT 1982
Ombudsman in relation to the operation of the Official Information Act in the context of
COVID-19.
Immediate Modification Orders under the Epidemic Preparedness Act 
2. On 24 March 2020, the Prime Minister issued an Epidemic Notice under section 5 of the
EPA. While an Epidemic Notice is in force the Governor-General may, by Order in
Council made on the recommendation of the Minister of the Crown responsible for the
administration of an enactment, modify any requirement or restriction imposed by the
enactment. This is called an “Immediate Modification Order”
3. It is not possible to suspend an Act using an Immediate Modification Order.
4. Under section 15 of the EPA, a modification order can be made only if:
4.1. the effects of the COVID-19 epidemic are, or are likely to be, such that the
requirements or restrictions are impossible or impracticable to comply, or comply 
INFORMATION 
fully, with; and 
4.2. the proposed modifications go no further than is, or is likely to be, reasonably 
necessary in the circumstances. 
5. The Ministry of Justice administers over 140 statutes. As with other agencies that
administer legislation, in the week of 20 March we began to scan our legislation for areas
where Immediate Modification Orders might be necessary, in anticipation of a potential
Epidemic Notice being made. This included making contact with other agencies, as
relevant, to inquire into whether  hey considered a modification or relaxation of
requirements in the Act was necessary.
Contact with Office of Ombudsman 
6. Below sets out the timeline of interactions with the Office of the Ombudsman regarding
the Official Information Act in the context of COVID-19.
6.1. Friday 20 March: Justice official left a voice message with the Office of
Ombudsman  inviting a discussion about the OIA Act and whether we should be 
looking at a modification order. 
6.2. Monday 23 March: Advisor at Office of Ombudsman returned the phone call. The 
Justice official: 
•
explained the purpose of an IMO under the Epidemic Preparedness Act, and that
we were scanning all of our legislation to see if any IMOs might need to be
considered, if an Epidemic Notice Act were made.
•
indicated that we were interested in whether any of the statutory requirements in
the Official Information Act might be impracticable to comply with. The statutory
Approved by: Rajesh Chhana, Deputy-Secretary, Policy. 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
9
 
timeframes for responding to requests as an example of a specific statutory 
requirement was used as an example. 
•  invited the Office of the Ombudsman to let us know what their views were in 
relation to the Official Information Act, and particularly the statutory timeframes, 
ACT 1982
and whether they thought an IMO should be considered.  
•  The Advisor at Office of Ombudsman said they would consult thei  colleagues 
and come back. 
6.3. Monday 23 March: Office of Ombudsman emailed with a response. It said: 
“The Chief Ombudsman has discussed with the Solicitor General the issue of a 
possible recommendation for modifications of the Official Information Act 1982 
under section 15 of the Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006  
As a result he agrees with the Solicitor General that The OIA has sufficient flexible 
provisions and mechanisms in place to allow agencies to manage requests during 
this difficult and rapidly evolving time. The Chief Ombudsman will be looking to 
issue guidance to agencies and requesters on the website to assist them. He will 
be doing this in consultation with the Solicitor General.” 
INFORMATION 
6.4. Tuesday 24 March: Office of Ombudsman shares that Chief Ombudsman released 
public statement on official information response times during the COVID-19 
emergency: https://www.ombudsman parliament.nz/news/chief-ombudsmans-
statement-official-information-response-times-during-covid-19-emergency 
 
6.5. Thursday 9 April: Office of Ombudsman advised that it was looking to publish a set of 
frequently asked questions for agencies and requesters covering requests for official 
information during COVID-19, and invited feedback prior to publication. 
 
6.6. Thursday 9 April: We responded to the Office of Ombudsman, expressing support for 
the guidance, and in pa ticular the suggested approach the grounds for refusing 
requests where the information cannot be accessed due to inability to access records in 
offices. We suggested it would be really helpful if there could be alignment between the 
Crown Law guidance and Ombudsman on this matter.  We also indicated that we were 
“still keeping an eye on whether any temporary modification is needed to the Act over 
this period” and that we would appreciate it if the Office could share any feedback it 
received about how agencies are meeting their OIA obligations and, in particular, 
whether any issues are arising that (in their view) cannot be sufficiently addressed 
through guidance. 
 
Media reporting and the Ombudsman’s response 
6.7. Following reporting by Newsroom on Thursday 23 April 2020, and a media query to the 
Ministry of Justice, a response attributed to Rajesh Chhana (Dep Sec, Policy) was 
provided.  A copy is attached.  
 
6.8. On Friday 24 April 2020, in response to the media reporting, the Chief Ombudsman Mr 
Peter Boshier contacted the Ministry and asked that our Chief Executive be advised 
that “What is in your statement, is accurate.” A copy is attached. 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
10
 
6.9. On Friday 24 April 2020, the Chief Ombudsman also shared with the Ministry a 
message that he sent to the Newsroom reporter in which he clarifies. A copy is 
attached. 
Contact with the Solicitor-General 
ACT 1982
7.  For completeness, we note that there was also discussion on 26/27 March between the 
Ministry of Justice and the Solicitor-General about whether an IMO for the Official 
Information Act should be considered in the context of COVID-19.  
ION 
8.  s9(2)(h)
 
 
   
9.  We were somewhat reassured by the Chief Ombudsman’s view that the issues can be 
managed within the existing provisions, support by guidance  We didn’t form a view on 
this idea, and did not progress further consideration of an  MO due to a lack of 
information about whether agencies were having difficulted meeting the timeframes.  
10. The Ministry of Justice did not provide any advice to the Minister about these ideas, as 
the discussions did not result in any proposal for a modification. 
INFORM
11. We supported the development of guidance by the Office of the Ombudsman and the 
Solicitor-General. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
11
 
ATTACHMENT 1: Ministry of Justice statement to Newsroom (Thursday 23 April 2020) 
 
To be attributed to Rajesh Chhana, Deputy Secretary, Policy: 
ACT 1982
“The Epidemic Preparedness Act enables legislative restrictions or requirements to be relaxed, 
by Order in Council, where the restriction is impossible or impracticable to comply with during 
an epidemic. When the Epidemic Notice was issued, all government agencies considered 
whether legislation they administer had such restrictions or requirements, in order to determine 
whether they should be relaxed to allow people to meet them during the lockdown periods.   
The Ministry of Justice administers the Official Information Act (OIA). As part of scanning the 
legislation that it administers, it sought the Ombudsman’s and Solicitor General’s view on 
whether any temporary modifications to the OIA would be required. At no point did the Ministry 
consider suspension of the Act. 
The Ombudsman and Solicitor General were of the view that the OIA is sufficiently flexible as is, 
and no temporary modifications are required. They indicated that they would prepare guidance 
INFORMATION 
on how to deal with situations where public servants cannot access their workplaces and hence 
respond to OIA requests on time. This guidance has now been issued. 
The Official Information Act, and the principal of availability of information, is very important in 
a well-functioning democracy. The Ombudsman’s advice on how to deal with official 
information requests during the COVID-19 pandemic is timely and useful.  
The Ministry will, as is its statutory duty, continue to monitor the effective functioning of the 
Official Information Act over this period, in conjunction with the Office of the Ombudsman and 
the Solicitor General.” 
Background: The guidance, available here, notes that if the information requested is not 
available remotely, agencies should not enter premises that are required to be closed during the 
lockdown in order to retrieve it. This would be in breach of orders made by the Director-General 
of Health. In such cases a request may be refused under section 18(c)(i) of the OIA. Agencies 
should provide an explanation as to why they are unable to access the information at issue 
without breaching the Director-General’s orders, and explain that requesters may resubmit 
their request again at a later date. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
12
 
ATTACHMENT 2: Email from Chief Ombudsman to Ministry of Justice (Friday 24 April) 
From: Peter Boshier <[email address]>  
Sent: Friday, 24 April 2020 12:40 PM 
ACT 1982
To: Mills, Hannah <[email address]> 
Cc: Mark Torley <[email address]>; Bridget Hewson 
<[email address]> 
Subject: Newsroom article 
 
Dear Hannah 
 
I am replying to you directly, because the newsroom report on this particular issue has 
bothered me. I have already remarked to my staff that the reporter has drawn a very long bow 
from comments I actually made. What is in your statement, is accurate. 
 
I would be most grateful if you could advise Andrew Kibblewhite of the correct position. Sadly, 
misconstructions can occur – it's life! 
 
INFORMATION 
Best regards 
 
Peter Boshier 
 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
13
 
ATTACHMENT 3: Email from Chief Ombudsman to Newsroom (Friday 24 April 2020) 
From: Mark Torley <[email address]>  
Sent: Friday, 24 April 2020 3:44 PM 
ACT 1982
To: Mills, Hannah <[email address]> 
Subject: FW: Article published this morning on the Official Information Act  
 
 
Hello again Hannah, 
 
The Chief Ombudsman has asked me to send you a copy of an email he has just sent to Sam 
Sachdeva in response to his article this morning. Could you please pass this on? Have and safe 
and happy long weekend. Kind regards Mark  
 
Dear Sam 
 
I have read your article published this morning on the Official Information Act and I wish to 
clarify some points with you. 
INFORMATION 
 
The vast majority of our interview this week was about how my office was performing in terms 
of its response to complaints under the Act during the pandemic, the guidance we have given 
to agencies and the proactive release of information. I felt I had a positive story to tell.     
 
I am disappointed you focussed on one aspect of our discussion in your story. 
 
I did not intend to suggest to you that the Official Information Act itself was to be suspended. 
What I hoped to have made clear was that some operational parts of the Act were being 
considered for suspension by way of temporary amendment as part of the emergency 
response. 
 
In the article, you stated that I was “forced to intervene in government plans”. I think this goes 
too far. 
 
I indicated during our interview that discussions about the Act were at a policy advisor level by 
way of consultation and I must stress to you that no one at a ministerial level was involved.  
 
Officials consulted with my office about whether any provisions contained in the Official 
Information Act should be relaxed or temporarily amended as part of the emergency response 
to the pandemic. 
 
I felt the public’s right to access meaningful information in a timely manner was more crucial in 
these exceptional circumstances such as when the Government was about to invoke its powers 
under section 15 of the Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006. 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
14
 
I discussed the issue with the Solicitor-General.  We both believed the law was robust and 
flexible enough as it was and there were no provisions that required suspension or temporary 
amendment.  
 
ACT 1982
I was very pleased that in the end no changes were made to the Official Information Act and it 
continues to operate as usual even in these challenging times. 
 
This is a fundamental matter to get right. The public’s confidence in the effective operation of 
the OIA during this time is critical.  It goes to the heart of democracy. I think it would be 
important for Newsroom to clarify my position. 
 
Best regards 
Peter Boshier 
Chief Ombudsman 
 
Karen Carter 
Executive Assistant to Peter Boshier, Chief Ombudsman 
Office of the Ombudsman | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata 
INFORMATION 
 
DDI 04 462 7843 | Phone 04 473 9533 | Mob 021 617 302 | Fax 04 471 2254 
Email [email address] | www.ombudsman.parliament.nz 
PO Box 10152, Level 7, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace, Wellington 
 
 
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL 
15

Document Outline