Summary of feedback from OI Forum workshop 13 August 2019
Review of the policy on the proactive release of Cabinet papers
Cabinet asked for the policy on the proactive release of Cabinet papers, commencing 1 January
2019, to be reviewed, with input from agencies, including whether:
•
the objectives of the policy are being met
•
changes are required to improve the effectiveness and clarity of the policy and the
supporting procedures, and
•
the policy should be broadened in any way.
Following the review, an ongoing monitoring regime and reporting of proactive release statistics is to
be formalised.
Objectives of the policy
•
To establish a process for the proactive release of more government information (to
increase its availability, enable more effective public participation and promote the
accountability of Ministers and officials)
o
ensuring New Zealand does not fall behind other jurisdictions on proactive release
practices
o
reducing or changing the nature of OIA requests
o
enhancing New Zealand’s reputation for being transparent and open
In the workshop, we asked:
•
Has it resulted in any policy or process changes in the way your agency prepares or
proactively releases information?
•
Has your agency seen a change to the number or nature of OIA requests received?
•
What challenges have you experienced in meeting the release expectations of the policy?
•
Is there any additional guidance or support required?
•
Are there any areas where the policy needs to be changed, or you could see it being
extended?
What agencies told us (see the appendix for the full set of comments)
Policies and processes
They have been updating their polices and processes, and applying concepts of proactive release
across types of documents i.e. OIA responses, Cabinet papers, and other types of documents.
Those who had existing policies for publishing OIA responses have been able to build on that.
This has included looking at their tracking/workflow systems or tools.
The practice is generally seen as positive, although the lack of protection for proactively released
documents, and the related due diligence considerations, mean there is a naturally more
conservative approach to release.
Some agencies report some pragmatic changes to the way they structure their documents to make
proactive release more straightforward, for example placing information that may need to be
redacted in separate sections.
Changes to number or nature of OIA requests?
The Cabinet paper policy obviously does not impact on agencies that produce few or no Cabinet
papers. These agencies are not seeing any changes in the nature or number of requests over and
above the general upward trend in OIA requests.
There has been some benefit for other agencies in being able to either refer OIA requestors to
published documents, or to advise that they will soon be publicly available, however this appear to
have been marginal.
There have also been additional requests following on from proactively released material.
Some have found the move towards proactive release has increased requesters’ expectations of
openness, including from Ministers.
Challenges
The release of Cabinet papers also requires a new way of working with Ministers’ offices, as agencies
can only advise regarding release, and the Minister makes the final call (albeit this is a similar
process to Ministerial OIAs prepared by agencies).
The 30-day timeframe can be challenging, especially when consultation with legal teams or other
agencies is required, as well as allowing for publication resourcing within agencies. Giving the
standard capacity pressures within a minister’s office, getting ministerial approval in a timely way
can also be difficult, especially if more than one minister is involved, and/or there are competing
priorities.
Agencies are also finding Ministers may change their minds re the timing of the paper’s release
between its consideration and the scheduled publication date. As the release is at ministers’
discretion, this is allowed for in the policy. However, it can mean agencies and ministers’ offices are
working to different timelines, and can cause difficulties for the publishing agencies, for example
getting decisions made in a timely way so they have sufficient notice/lead time to allow for their
internal publishing processes to be followed.
Travel papers, drafted in the Minister’s office, are being prepared for release by agencies. Unlike
above, agencies will not have had direct input into the drafting, are reliant on advice from the office,
and still need to publish on agency websites. Consultation with other agencies, including with MFAT
where required, eats into the time. However, Ministers can choose to release the travel paper and
report together, which has a number of benefits. Agencies are encouraged to have these
conversations with their Ministers’ offices.
Agencies also need to build capability in this area. This is a new environment and set of practices
that bring a different skill set, and new knowledge beyond the OIA when it comes to “due diligence”
considerations and protecting agencies and ministers against liabilities. This has meant more
involvement by legal team than might have occurred previously.
The policy also increases capacity pressure in an area that is already commonly stretched, especially
in small- to mid-sized agencies.
It also requires staff to think and sometime write, or at least structure, their documents in different
ways.
Some of these challenges have been exacerbated by the limitations of document management
systems or workflow tools in some agencies.
Note there is some new CabNet reporting being developed the Cabinet Office that should help
agencies track the progress of Cabinet items through the system, which will in turn assist with
publication planning and tracking.
Additional guidance or support
The biggest gain look like it will come from agencies sharing tools, policies and procedures.
Reporting
There is general view that centralised reporting of proactive release is preferable. This provides
structure and consistency around reporting, as has largely occurred with the OIA statistics. This also
increases the visibility of this practice, and potentially the utility of proactively released material by
creating a centralised resource that points to proactive release pages on agency websites (noting
that not all agencies have this.)
The general view was to capture this information six-monthly along with the OIA statistics, balancing
transparency with managing the burden on agencies.
With regard to what measures should be used, the most common suggestion was the total number
of Cabinet papers released in full, and with redactions.
Measurement of the timeliness of release in relation to the policy would see the reprinting of a
percentage and/or number released within the 30 days or according to the stated intention in the
paper.
This aspect considered harder due to the dependence/discretion of minister with regard to release,
and that this may not reflect the work put in by agencies.
The suggestions were mostly related to measuring the release of cabinet papers. The measurement
of other proactive release is more difficult, partly due to the issue of “what do we count, and how to
we apply this consistently across agencies”, and partly the question of “what are we trying to
show/demonstrate/achieve by measuring this?”
Appendix: compiled comments from 13 August
Changes to policies and processes?
Sensitive information that may need to be withheld is being “clumped” in documents and labelled to
speed up review and redaction (where necessary)
A register of proactive releases is being kept
Following similar principles in briefings, seeking agreement to publish on agency website
Agencies are using proactive release positively
Some agencies it is now the default to put the OIA response online e.g. Pharmac
Some very limited release already in place, but have had to develop new policy/process
Some policy change to rest of proactive release processes, e.g. s 18(d) OIA
MBIE has developed policy and procedures for PR due to volume.
Now getting on the radar for other agencies
Basic tracking information in workflow systems/spreadsheets.
Categorise/quantitive narrative – paper types – information/agency types
Yes - PR policies and process in place, training and guidance
Generally as for OIA process
Sometimes may err on the side of caution with regard to due diligence (in which case not using the
OIA related text in OIA cover page)
Starting to work with Minister’s office on releasing travel papers
Changes to number or nature of OIA requests?
More requests, some more specific, some for “more of the same”
Seen more OIAs – more blanket requests from media
General expectation that more information will be released
Some OIAs have been able to be referred to Cabinet releases
No noticeable changes to OIA requests
Some requests are being refused under 18(d) in that they will soon be publicly available
Number: no, Nature: yes. Education now publishes list of tables, now see fewer filing OIAs
Have not noticed a change in number or nature of OIAs
Yes and no – more requests for correspondence/supporting material to PR material – politicians and
media asking mostly.
More requests for former Minister’s material
Challenges?
Agreeing timelines can be challenging, especially where other agencies are involved, and needing to
factor in the time at the Minister’s office
Managing differences with what has been released previously
Coming at the same time as the release of ministerial diaries
Struggling to meet 30 working days – is the timing realistic? Possible review?
Joint reports – new policy developed, but agencies are at different places
Determining how to incorporate Cabinet papers into existing process has been a challenge
Biggest challenge has been the bottleneck of the Minister’s office – limited physical resource in the
Parliamentary Office
Do need to give material for proactive release a careful review – another step in the process
Added secrecy provision in legislation – added dimension for some agencies. Not so relevant to
Cabinet Paper, but OIA releases
What is soon? Ombudsman - 8 weeks – no guidance from Speaker
Challenge embedding culture of PR. Very limited prior experience
IT challenges – website, workflow monitoring. Differentiation in purely transitional OIAs
At time of OIA preparation and delivery, Education OIA advisors prep a response to proactively
release
Overarching information management issues are a key operational challenge for several agencies.
Document management is very tough
Meeting timeframes, getting papers across the line, people following the instructions
Travel papers – approval paper and report back should be a package – very inefficient do as two
releases
Some Ministers delay publication [note – this is allowed for in the policy]
It will vary and outside our control
Distributed agency will need centralised team – large number of portfolios
Need to develop resources for legal
No workflow tool
Urgent timeframes hard to meet with current resourcing
Additional guidance or support?
Request for agencies to share tools, policies and procedures
Changes to the policy?
Issues more around guidance, consistency, sharing best practice (for example releasing travel papers
and reports back as a “set” rather than two individual releases).
Reporting
Link to proactive release sites on agency websites (where applicable – some proactively release in
dispersed, subject matter specific way
High value types [appears to relate to what is reported]
Collect centrally to allow comparison
Volumes still slow
Recording for withheld material
Balancing ministerial expectations
Should have published vs what was published is known
Smaller agencies or agencies with low volumes life is easier
What the goal – what do the numbers tell us vs assurance to public that agencies are proactively
releasing “properly” i.e. what is the public interest, yardstick etc.
Agree with central periodic reporting – wrap Cabinet papers into that
Capture number of papers released in full and number of those with redactions
MBIE captures number of papers subjected to release, number released on time, delayed in
Minister’s office or subject to announcement
Frequency – six monthly (with OIA Stats)
Not the number, maybe the percentage released within 30 days/due date (of those that have been
agreed for release)
Can give total number published and redactions made
Good to report released in full, released in part, not released
We do not know what we do not know due to self-reporting model
SSC should collect all OIA stats
Timeliness important – 30 working days
Portfolio numbers and total papers overall
Verbal comments in final discussion - not recorded on feedback sheets:
Measuring volumes is good, but timeliness is harder, and is a ministerial measure rather than an
agency one
Timeliness reflects ministerial discretion and will not reflect the work done by agencies
Records types of papers
More time is needed for this to come BAU, for agencies and the interactions with Minister’s offices
