Money spent on cellphone surveillance equipment in last 12 months (from December 2016)
Cody C made this Official Information request to New Zealand Police
The request was refused by New Zealand Police.
From: Cody C
Dear New Zealand Police,
Attn: Ministerial Services
I am requesting the total amount spent on cellphone surveillance equipment in the last 12 months in accordance with the Official Information Act 1982.
For the purposes of the Act, I am a New Zealand citizen and residing in New Zealand at the time of making this request. You generally have 20 working days to respond to this notice, as required by law. Your response will be published publicly on the fyi.org.nz website.
Yours faithfully,
Cody C
From: Cody C
Dear New Zealand Police,
Please acknowledge my request and forward to Ministerial Services.
Yours faithfully,
Cody C
New Zealand Police
Hi Cody,
Thank you for your email, I have forwarded it to ministerial services on
your behalf.
Kind regards
Crime Reporting Line
-----Cody C <[FYI request #5101 email]> wrote: -----
To: OIA/LGOIMA requests at New Zealand Police <[New Zealand Police request email]>
From: Cody C <[FYI request #5101 email]>
Date: 28/12/2016 01:46PM
Subject: Re: Official Information request - Money spent on cellphone
surveillance equipment in last 12 months (from December 2016)
Dear New Zealand Police,
Please acknowledge my request and forward to Ministerial Services.
Yours faithfully,
Cody C
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FYI request #5101 email]
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[1]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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
1. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
hide quoted sections
From: SEDGWICK, Alexandria
New Zealand Police
Dear Cody
I have been asked to send you the attached response to your request of 15
December 2016.
Kind regards
[1]http://nzpintranet/resources/Secure%20Im... Ali Sedgwick
Ministerial Services Advisor |
Ministerial Services | New Zealand
Police
E:
[2][email address]
Police National Headquarters, 180
Molesworth Street, Thorndon, PO Box
3017, Wellington 6011
[3]www.police.govt.nz
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.police.govt.nz/
From: Cody C
Dear SEDGWICK, Alexandria,
I completely understand the position entrusted in Police to ensure the maintenance of law and order in New Zealand. However, I strongly refute the claim that releasing the expenditure on cellphone surveillance equipment for the year ending 2016 would meet the test for refusal of the request pursuant to the OIA under security grounds.
The request does not encompass methods or techniques for surveillance nor does it reveal the capability to perform surveillance using cellphones. For instance, if no equipment exists under Police this equipment may exist under another Department. If there were no equipment costs, it does not reveal that Police do or do not perform surveillance, only that there was no expenditure in 2016 on this area, however, this may have been incurred in previous years.
If the total figure was released, it would have no bearing on Police's ability to perform or not perform surveillance on cellphones. It is for these reasons that I ask you to reconsider the request in good faith, least the matter become referred to the Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely,
Cody C
From: SEDGWICK, Alexandria
New Zealand Police
Good morning Cody
Thank you for your email. I have contacted the workgroup who prepared the response and you will hear from them shortly.
Kind regards
Ali Sedgwick
Ministerial Services Advisor | Ministerial Services | New Zealand Police
E: [email address]
Police National Headquarters, 180 Molesworth Street, Thorndon, PO Box 3017, Wellington 6011 www.police.govt.nz
-----Original Message-----
From: Cody C [mailto:[FOI #5101 email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 March 2017 7:33 p.m.
To: SEDGWICK, Alexandria <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Official Information reply ref: 16/3392/4
Dear SEDGWICK, Alexandria,
I completely understand the position entrusted in Police to ensure the maintenance of law and order in New Zealand. However, I strongly refute the claim that releasing the expenditure on cellphone surveillance equipment for the year ending 2016 would meet the test for refusal of the request pursuant to the OIA under security grounds.
The request does not encompass methods or techniques for surveillance nor does it reveal the capability to perform surveillance using cellphones. For instance, if no equipment exists under Police this equipment may exist under another Department. If there were no equipment costs, it does not reveal that Police do or do not perform surveillance, only that there was no expenditure in 2016 on this area, however, this may have been incurred in previous years.
If the total figure was released, it would have no bearing on Police's ability to perform or not perform surveillance on cellphones. It is for these reasons that I ask you to reconsider the request in good faith, least the matter become referred to the Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely,
Cody C
-----Original Message-----
Dear Cody
I have been asked to send you the attached response to your request of 15 December 2016.
Kind regards
[1]http://nzpintranet/resources/Secure%20Im... Ali Sedgwick Ministerial Services Advisor | Ministerial Services | New Zealand Police
E:
[2][email address]
Police National Headquarters, 180
Molesworth Street, Thorndon, PO Box
3017, Wellington 6011
[3]www.police.govt.nz
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.police.govt.nz/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #5101 email]
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
hide quoted sections
From: SEDGWICK, Alexandria
New Zealand Police
Good afternoon Cody
I have been advised that Police’s position does not change. The amount
spent indicates the size of investment in capability (or not, if no money
spent). This would clearly indicate to criminals the extent of our
capability and reach (or not).
If you are still unsatisfied with Police’s response, I remind you of your
right to lay a complaint with the Ombudsman.
Kind regards
Ali
[1]http://nzpintranet/resources/Secure%20Im... Ali Sedgwick
Ministerial Services Advisor |
Ministerial Services | New Zealand
Police
E:
[2][email address]
Police National Headquarters, 180
Molesworth Street, Thorndon, PO Box
3017, Wellington 6011
[3]www.police.govt.nz
-----Original Message-----
From: Cody C [mailto:[FYI request #5101 email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 March 2017 7:33 p.m.
To: SEDGWICK, Alexandria <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Official Information reply ref: 16/3392/4
Dear SEDGWICK, Alexandria,
I completely understand the position entrusted in Police to ensure the
maintenance of law and order in New Zealand. However, I strongly refute
the claim that releasing the expenditure on cellphone surveillance
equipment for the year ending 2016 would meet the test for refusal of the
request pursuant to the OIA under security grounds.
The request does not encompass methods or techniques for surveillance nor
does it reveal the capability to perform surveillance using cellphones.
For instance, if no equipment exists under Police this equipment may exist
under another Department. If there were no equipment costs, it does not
reveal that Police do or do not perform surveillance, only that there was
no expenditure in 2016 on this area, however, this may have been incurred
in previous years.
If the total figure was released, it would have no bearing on Police's
ability to perform or not perform surveillance on cellphones. It is for
these reasons that I ask you to reconsider the request in good faith,
least the matter become referred to the Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely,
Cody C
-----Original Message-----
Dear Cody
I have been asked to send you the attached response to your request of 15
December 2016.
Kind regards
[1][4]http://nzpintranet/resources/Secure%20Im...
Ali Sedgwick Ministerial Services Advisor | Ministerial Services | New
Zealand Police
E:
[2][email address]
Police National Headquarters, 180
Molesworth Street, Thorndon, PO Box
3017, Wellington 6011
[3][5]www.police.govt.nz
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily
reflect those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this
message in error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
2. [6]mailto:[email address]
3. [7]http://www.police.govt.nz/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[8][FYI request #5101 email]
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[9]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
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.police.govt.nz/
4. http://nzpintranet/resources/Secure%20Im...
5. http://www.police.govt.nz/
6. mailto:[email
7. http://www.police.govt.nz/
8. mailto:[FYI request #5101 email]
9. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
hide 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 requestAct on what you've learnt
Similar requests
Specific research used to estimate potential social harm of cannabis
To New Zealand Police by Mark Hanna
Luke C left an annotation ()
The response from Police explains that want to protect their surveillance methods and think that if they information as to their capability or capacity that would harm the public interest.
The fact is that the information requested was the total amount spent on cellphone surveillance. This information does not relate to methods or techniques. It relates to the Police's capability to detect offending using cellphones, only to the extent that it relates to equipment within that year (e.g. procurement of new equipment or maintenance of existing equipment). If no equipment exists by Police, that does not necessarily mean that there is no surveillance of cellphone communications as there are other agencies that may (or may not) surveil these devices. If there were no equipment costs, it does not reveal that the Police do or do not undertake surveillance of cellphones. It simply means that there was no expenditure on equipment for that particular year, but there could have been expenditure in previous years.
If the total figure was released, it would have no bearing on Police's ability to detect or not detect offences using cellphones.
Link to this