Dear Mr Baker,

 

I refer to your request of 24 September 2021. The University’s response
follows.

 

The documents requested are refused under the following sections of the
Official Information Act 1982:

 

o Section 9(2)(ba), to protect information subject to an obligation of
confidence;
o Section 9(2)(g)(i), to maintain the effective conduct of public
affairs through the free and frank expression of opinions by or
between or to Ministers of the Crown or members of an organisation or
officers and employees of any public service agency or organisation in
the course of their duty;
o Section 9(2)(g)(ii), to maintain the effective conduct of public
affairs through the protection of such Ministers, members of
organisations, officers, and employees from harassment.

 

You have the right to make a complaint to an Ombudsman if you are
dissatisfied with this response.

 

Yours sincerely,

Rebecca Ewert

General Counsel

University of Auckland

 

From: Mr T. Baker <[1][FOI #16875 email]>
Sent: Friday, 24 September 2021 2:02 PM
To: legal <[2][email address]>
Subject: Official Information request - Te Punaha Matatini Covid-19
Vaccination Modelling correspondence

 

Dear University of Auckland,

On 23rd September, Te Punaha Matatini (a "Centre of Research Excellence
hosted by the University of Auckland") released a paper "Modelling to
support a future COVID-19 strategy for Aotearoa New Zealand", and one of
the authors was streamed into a live press conference with the Prime
Minister.

Please provide all correspondence (emails, letters, texts, meetings,
meeting minutes etc) relating to Covid-19 vaccination modelling between
Government (Ministry of Health, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet,
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, including any Ministers)
and Te Punaha Matatini (including report authors and individuals
associated with Te Punaha Matatini), from 1st April 2021 to 24 September
2021.

Prof. Shaun Hendy was reported as stating the vaccination model "had been
peer-reviewed earlier in the year". Please provide:
- all evidence, comments, correspondence and outcome relating to "peer
review" of vaccination model that underpins Te Punaha Matatini Covid-19
vaccination report(s).
- all evidence, comments, correspondence and outcome relating to "peer
review" of vaccination modelling reports (those released by Te Punaha
Matatini on 23 September, and 30 June 2021).

Yours faithfully,

Mr T. Baker

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[3][FOI #16875 email]

Is [4][University of Auckland request email] the wrong address for Official Information
requests to University of Auckland? If so, please contact us using this
form:
[5]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[6]https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers

If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #16875 email]
2. mailto:[email address]
3. mailto:[FOI #16875 email]
4. mailto:[University of Auckland request email]
5. https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
6. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers

Dear Mr Baker,

 I refer to your email of 22 October 2021. We understood your request as
relating to documents relating to the peer review process, rather than a
request for a copy of the peer reviewed research itself.

Professor Shaun Hendy has advised that an academic peer review panel
reviews TPM’s models before they are published on the University’s
website. The resulting reports are published on the website and marked as
“Not formally peer reviewed” to distinguish them from journal articles
that have undergone blind peer review managed by a journal editor. TPM’s
policy on this matter is as follows:

"Review of outputs

o Prior to public release TPM reports will have had an appropriate
technical peer review by its academic peer review panel." 

The content of academic peer review is confidential, and accordingly the
documents requested relating to peer review were withheld under the
corresponding ground in the OIA.

Yours sincerely,

Rebecca Ewert

General Counsel
University of Auckland

 

From: Mr T. Baker <[FYI request #16875 email]>
Sent: Friday, 22 October 2021 11:54 AM
To: Rebecca Ewert <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Official Information request - Te Punaha Matatini Covid-19
Vaccination Modelling correspondence

 

Dear Rebecca Ewert,

I can appreciate that the first part of my request (correspondence with
government) may be refused under those sections of the Act,

However can you confirm also that the second part of my request relating
to correspondence and outcome of peer review is also refused? The two
reports in question are in the public domain, yet explicitly state they
have not undergone peer review.

Is it the University's official position that the non-peer reviewed
reports can be released publicly, whereas the peer reviewed versions are
not? If so, why are the peer reviewed reports not publicly releaseable,
whereas the peer reviewed versions are?

Yours sincerely,

Mr T. Baker

show quoted sections