Labour calls for formal audit of govt’s record keeping and OIA practice

Labour is calling on the Auditor-General to formally audit the office of the Prime Minister’s record-keeping and Official Information Act practices.

It comes after the Chief Ombudsman confirmed the focus of his investigation following a complaint about the way PMO handled an OIA request.

RNZ had reported a complaint was being investigated regarding the “apparent withholding” of official information, following the revelation of a previously undisclosed document handed to a senior staffer that should have been captured by the request.

It was also revealed that document was sent to the staffer’s private email.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has already announced the Department of Internal Affairs will conduct a review of the former staff member’s IT account to “ensure there are no further documents or meetings relating to the Smith v Fonterra case that should be released”.

Labour justice spokesperson Camilla Belich has written to the Auditor-General requesting the audit, suggesting the Ombudsman and DIA investigations weren’t enough.

“Trust in government depends on New Zealanders being able to see how decisions are made and who is influencing them.

“When records of meetings with corporate lobbyists don’t exist, that trust is undermined,” she said.

Belich referenced the government’s legislation to prevent companies being sued over climate change, and the way lobbying documents from two companies involved in the relevant court case were hand-delivered to PMO, but “were never recorded and never disclosed in response to an OIA request.”

“When Parliament asked Christopher Luxon about it, he said there was ‘no record or recollection’ of those meetings. That is simply not good enough,” she said.

Her request to the Auditor-General asked for a performance audit of PMO, specifically looking at:

• whether the Office has adequate systems, controls, training and assurance arrangements for recording meetings, briefings and other communications with external parties, including private interests and their representatives;
• whether the records maintained by the Office over a defined recent period reflect a complete and accurate account of those meetings, briefings and communications, or whether material engagements, including hand-delivered briefings and communications conducted through private accounts, have gone unrecorded;
• whether the Office is meeting its obligations under the Public Records Act 2005, including in respect of hand-delivered briefings, documents tabled at meetings, and other communications bearing on government decision-making;
• whether the systems supporting the Office’s Official Information Act responses are designed and operated so that information actually held is reliably searched, surfaced and disclosed; and whether the Office’s record-keeping and disclosure practice is commensurate with the integrity expectations Parliament and the public are entitled to hold.

She said an audit was necessary because the previously undisclosed document, and the related issues, concern “an office at the apex of executive government, with the seniority of staff support it commands.”

She said the existing inquiries, by the Ombudsman and the Department of Internal Affairs were “valuable” but not “impartial”.

“Neither is positioned to tell Parliament whether the office’s systems for recording, retaining and disclosing its dealings with external parties are sound.

“That assurance is one your office is uniquely placed to provide with the requisite independence.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.