Labour Calls For Formal Audit Of Govt’s Record Keeping And OIA Practice

Lillian
Hanly, Political reporter

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.

Labour
justice spokesperson Camilla Belich has written to the
Auditor-General requesting the audit.

“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.”

© Scoop Media