Section 201 Land Transport Act 1998
Shelly made this Official Information request to Ministry of Transport
This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Shelly to read a recent response and update the status.
From: Shelly
To Ministry of Transport,
How is the Ministry delegating function and power to other agencies when the ability to do so has been repealed since 1 December 2004?
USE OF OUTSIDE AGENCIES IN PERFORMANCE OF FUNCTIONS:
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/publ...
How is the Police Commissioner who is an agent of the Police Agency given authority to warrant "transport enforcement officers" on the road when the Ministry has no ability to give it under s 201 of the LTA 1998?
NZTA has responded 20 December 2024 and directed me to contact the Ministry as they could not provide an answer. The NZTA have also responded to a colleague stating quote; "The NZ Police "create pseudo license numbers" when a speed camera issues a ticket for a company or individual that has no driver license. After 28 days of the fee not being paid, they issue the pseudo number in order to make the payment "stick".
How are they creating fake license numbers when they haven't been "warranted" to do so?
Cheers,
Shelly
From: OIA
Ministry of Transport
Kia ora Shelly,
Thank you for your email, and your questions regarding interpretation of
legislation.
The powers to which you refer are held by the New Zealand Police and any
inquiries regarding NZ Police should be referred directly to them for
response.
Also, you may wish to seek independent legal advice.
The Citizens Advice Bureau is an accessible resource you can utilise in
this instance. You can reach them here: [1]https://www.cab.org.nz/
Given the nature of your inquiry, we have not interpreted this to be an
Official Information Act Request.
Ngā mihi
Accountability and Correspondence
show quoted sections
From: Shelly
To OIA,
The powers by police have been given under the LTA 1998. It is quite clear in the policing act 2008 they require a warrant to have authority on the road. You are publicly refusing to provide an answer for the despite it written in the processes and procedures police, nzta, the ministry AND MOJ are legally obligated to comply with. Ministry of Justice administer the OIA who are also very friendly with the above-mentioned.
Section 2 of the OIA 1982, interpretation defines "official information" (a)(i) a public service agency; or (a)(ii) a minister of the crown in his official capacity.
I am observing the ones responding to these requests are the ones that need to seek "legal advice" as they do not have any understanding of the legal obligations and cannot interpret and apply legislative acts to fiduciary duties.
A request was made to the nzta, they directed to mot. Mot are now directing to the nz police who have already been sent a request. Are we playing ping pong here? Ka pai, this is evidence for anyone reading it that govt agencies "do not comply with legal obligations" it is not rebutted here so it stands as FACT.
Shelly
From: Shelly
OIA,
Who has sent this response to the request? No name? No accountability or correspondence given in the response. I may wish to seek legal advice, but I have a legal qualification so don't require it. Is there anyone who can respond that "has legal acumen" to deal with the request? If not, why are they responding to the public who are seeking information? Is this another "breach"?
Shelly
From: OIA
Ministry of Transport
Mōrena Shelly,
We are glad to hear that you have sought a response from the relevant
agency for your query, that being the New Zealand Police.
Have a lovely day and a wonderful holiday season.
Ngā mihi
Accountability and Correspondence
Ministry of Transport
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request
Shelly left an annotation ()
The difference between "issue" and "create" can be understood in the following ways:
Issue: Refers to the formal act of providing or distributing a document or item to an individual or entity.
In the context of driver licences, "issuing" means granting a physical or digital licence that confers legal rights or privileges to the holder (e.g., the ability to drive).
The term implies a completed process where the recipient receives something tangible or officially recognized.
Create: Refers to the act of bringing something into existence, often in a record-keeping or administrative context.
In terms of driver licences, "creating" a pseudo licence means generating a record in a database for administrative purposes, but it does not confer any legal driving privileges.
The term suggests an initial step in a process rather than the final act of distribution.
In summary, "issue" implies providing something that has practical use and legal standing, while "create" refers to the generation of a record or entry without necessarily conferring rights or privileges. In your context, NZTA issues driver licences, while police create pseudo licences as administrative records without issuing them in the traditional sense.
Link to this