11 March 2022
Scott
[FYI request #18386 email]
Tēnā koe Scott,
Official Information Act request: Data Ethics Advisory Group information
Thank you for your request dated 31 January 2022, requesting the following information
under the Of icial Information Act 1982 (the Act):
ONE: A copy of the Martin Jenkins review of the Data Ethics Advisory Group
TWO: Copies of the agendas and minutes of all meetings held since October 2020
THREE: A copy of the discussion paper written for Customs NZ on the topic of
security vs. transparency
FOUR: A list of all discussion papers written by the group since its formation,
including the title of the paper, date it was published, and agency that the paper was
written for (if any)
We earlier contacted you to request an extension to allow for necessary consultations. We
extended the request to 15 March 2022.
We have responded below to each of the four parts of your request in turn.
ONE: A copy of the Martin Jenkins review of the Data Ethics Advisory Group
A copy of the report by Martin Jenkins entitled
Data Ethics Advisory Group Review (dated 12
November 2020) is appended to this response. Stats NZ has released this report in full.
TWO: Copies of the agendas and minutes of all meetings held since October 2020
The Data Ethics Advisory Group (DEAG) have met once since October 2020, which
occurred on 3 December 2020.
Appended to this response is a copy of the agenda for the 3 December 2020 meeting.
Minutes for DEAG’s meetings are ordinarily produced and published on the basis that they
form advice to government agencies. No minutes were taken for this meeting as the DEAG
focussed on reviewing a draft of the Digital Council for Aotearoa’s report
‘Towards
trustworthy and trusted automated decision-making in Aotearoa’ (the final published report is
accessibl
e here). As the information does not exist, this part of your request is refused under
section 18(e) of the Act.
THREE: A copy of the discussion paper written for Customs NZ on the topic of
security vs. transparency
We recognise that a document released under a separate OIA request on the FYI.org.nz
website (se
e here) contains reference to ‘‘
Stats NZ had done some work with Customs New
Zealand and written a discussion paper regarding the dimensions of security vs.
transparency’. We have made the assumption that this forms the basis of your 31 January
request, although the information does not appear to relate to the DEAG.
For clarity, we are not aware of any meetings between the DEAG and Customs NZ and are
unable to find any material indicating that any meetings took place. We have consulted with
Customs NZ and the DEAG on your request and they have confirmed that neither hold that
information. For this reason, we have determined that the discussion paper referred to does
not exist, and therefore refuse this part of your request under section 18(e) of the Act.
FOUR: A list of all discussion papers written by the group since its formation,
including the title of the paper, date it was published, and agency that the paper was
written for (if any)
Al discussion papers which fall within the scope of your request have been published on the
Government’s data.govt.nz website and are publicly accessibl
e here. As the information you
have requested is already publicly available, this part of your request is refused under
section 18(d) of the Act.
If you are not satisfied with this response, you have the right to seek an investigation and
review by the Ombudsman. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or 0800 802 602.
It is our policy to proactively release our responses to official information requests where
possible. This letter, with your personal details removed, wil be published on the Stats NZ
website. Publishing responses creates greater openness and transparency of government
decision-making and helps better inform public understanding of the reasons for decisions.
Ngā mihi nui
Kate Satterthwaite
Senior Manager, Executive and Government Relations
Office of the Chief Executive
Document Outline
