Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties made this Official Information request to Statistics New Zealand
The request was refused by Statistics New Zealand.
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
This is a request for information under the Official Information Act.
On 12 April 2022, the department refused the Council’s request of 8 February 2022 (correspondence for which can be found here: https://fyi.org.nz/request/18491-stats-n...).
Please provide the Council with the following information:
1. A list of all email communications to and from any Statistics New Zealand employee, secondee or contractor and any Customs New Zealand employee, secondee or contractor for the period 1 May 2018 – 30 April 2022. This list should include the sent or received date, the email account it was sent from or received by, the subject line and the filenames of any documents attached to the email. Under section 16 of the OIA, our preferred means of receiving this information is in tabular form in spreadsheet or CSV format.
2. The contents of all emails identified by Statistics NZ in the list generated when responding to item 1 above that relate to the following topics:
a. Data sharing
b. Data ethics
c. Data security
d. Transparency
e. Data governance
f. Data management
g. The writing or circulation of advice, a paper, memo or guidance on ‘security vs transparency’
3. The attachments to any of the emails meeting the criteria identified in items 1 and 2 above.
4. All email communications received by any Statistics NZ employee, secondee or contractor from an employee, secondee or contractor of the NZ Security Intelligence Service in the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022 relating to any of the terms identified in item 2 above.
5. All notes or other written material held by Statistics NZ of meetings any of its employees, secondees or contractors have had with any employees, secondees or contractors of the NZ Security Intelligence Service for the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022 relating to any of the terms identified in item 2 above.
The Council looks forward to receiving the requested information as soon as reasonably practicable and no later than 20 working days after receipt of this request. Should the department need to discuss or clarify any aspect of the request, please contact the Council by replying to the email address from which this request was received.
Under section 16 of the OIA, our preference for receiving this information is by email response to the address from which the department received this request. Also under section 16 of the OIA, our preference is to receive this information as searchable documents not image-only PDFs. Further under section 16, our preference is for the information not to be watermarked with ‘released under the OIA’ or similar text. The only permitted reasons for not complying with the Council’s section 16 preferences are set out in section 16(2) of the Act.
Under section 19(a)(ii) of the OIA, if the department withholds any information under sections 6 or 9 in its response to this request, we further request that the department provide the Council with the grounds underpinning the reasons for withholding that it cites.
Nāku noa, nā
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
From: Ruth Naude
Statistics New Zealand
Kia ora Andrew,
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your Official Information Act request.
We received your request today, Tuesday 3 May 2022. We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than 31 May 2022, being 20 working days after the day your request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.
Your request is being handled by the Office of the Government Statistician and Chief Executive. If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me using the details in the signature below. If any additional factors come to light which are relevant to your request, please do not hesitate to contact us so these can be taken into account.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua
Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-----Original Message-----
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties <[FOI #19254 email]>
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2022 5:00 PM
To: Info Mailin - Shared Mailbox <[email address]>
Subject: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
This is a request for information under the Official Information Act.
On 12 April 2022, the department refused the Council’s request of 8 February 2022 (correspondence for which can be found here: https://fyi.org.nz/request/18491-stats-n...).
Please provide the Council with the following information:
1. A list of all email communications to and from any Statistics New Zealand employee, secondee or contractor and any Customs New Zealand employee, secondee or contractor for the period 1 May 2018 – 30 April 2022. This list should include the sent or received date, the email account it was sent from or received by, the subject line and the filenames of any documents attached to the email. Under section 16 of the OIA, our preferred means of receiving this information is in tabular form in spreadsheet or CSV format.
2. The contents of all emails identified by Statistics NZ in the list generated when responding to item 1 above that relate to the following topics:
a. Data sharing
b. Data ethics
c. Data security
d. Transparency
e. Data governance
f. Data management
g. The writing or circulation of advice, a paper, memo or guidance on ‘security vs transparency’
3. The attachments to any of the emails meeting the criteria identified in items 1 and 2 above.
4. All email communications received by any Statistics NZ employee, secondee or contractor from an employee, secondee or contractor of the NZ Security Intelligence Service in the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022 relating to any of the terms identified in item 2 above.
5. All notes or other written material held by Statistics NZ of meetings any of its employees, secondees or contractors have had with any employees, secondees or contractors of the NZ Security Intelligence Service for the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022 relating to any of the terms identified in item 2 above.
The Council looks forward to receiving the requested information as soon as reasonably practicable and no later than 20 working days after receipt of this request. Should the department need to discuss or clarify any aspect of the request, please contact the Council by replying to the email address from which this request was received.
Under section 16 of the OIA, our preference for receiving this information is by email response to the address from which the department received this request. Also under section 16 of the OIA, our preference is to receive this information as searchable documents not image-only PDFs. Further under section 16, our preference is for the information not to be watermarked with ‘released under the OIA’ or similar text. The only permitted reasons for not complying with the Council’s section 16 preferences are set out in section 16(2) of the Act.
Under section 19(a)(ii) of the OIA, if the department withholds any information under sections 6 or 9 in its response to this request, we further request that the department provide the Council with the grounds underpinning the reasons for withholding that it cites.
Nāku noa, nā
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #19254 email]
Is [Statistics New Zealand request email] the wrong address for Official Information requests to Statistics New Zealand? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
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: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Kia ora Ruth,
Thank you for your response.
Unfortunately Statistics NZ's understanding of when the OIA request was received is deficient.
Please refer to the Ombudsman's guide to requests made online:
https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...
On pages 5-6 the following guidance from the Ombudsman is relevant:
"Where an agency has designated a particular information system (like an email address, Twitter account, or Facebook page) for the purpose of receiving electronic communications, those communications will be taken to be received at the time they enter the information system, not when they come to the agency’s attention.[6]
So whenever the email, tweet or post enters the system, that’s when it’s received. Use that date as the day of receipt for the purpose of calculating the maximum 20 working days for responding to an official information request. This is so regardless of whether the email, tweet or post was received outside business hours. The definition of ‘working day’ in the OIA and LGOIMA makes no reference to business hours.[7] Use the online calculator on our homepage to help calculate maximum response times.
[6] See s 214 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.
[7] See s 2 OIA and LGOIMA."
Consequently, Statistics NZ received the Council's request on 2 May 2022 and, according to the Ombudsman's online calculator, the 20th working day is Monday 30 May 2022.
Ngā mihi,
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
From: Ruth Naude
Statistics New Zealand
Kia ora Andrew,
My apologies for that. Stats NZ received your request on Monday 2 May 2022. We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than 30 May 2022, being 20 working days after the day your request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua
Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-----Original Message-----
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties <[FOI #19254 email]>
Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2022 12:08 pm
To: Ruth Naude <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Kia ora Ruth,
Thank you for your response.
Unfortunately Statistics NZ's understanding of when the OIA request was received is deficient.
Please refer to the Ombudsman's guide to requests made online:
https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...
On pages 5-6 the following guidance from the Ombudsman is relevant:
"Where an agency has designated a particular information system (like an email address, Twitter account, or Facebook page) for the purpose of receiving electronic communications, those communications will be taken to be received at the time they enter the information system, not when they come to the agency’s attention.[6]
So whenever the email, tweet or post enters the system, that’s when it’s received. Use that date as the day of receipt for the purpose of calculating the maximum 20 working days for responding to an official information request. This is so regardless of whether the email, tweet or post was received outside business hours. The definition of ‘working day’ in the OIA and LGOIMA makes no reference to business hours.[7] Use the online calculator on our homepage to help calculate maximum response times.
[6] See s 214 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.
[7] See s 2 OIA and LGOIMA."
Consequently, Statistics NZ received the Council's request on 2 May 2022 and, according to the Ombudsman's online calculator, the 20th working day is Monday 30 May 2022.
Ngā mihi,
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
-----Original Message-----
Kia ora Andrew,
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your Official Information Act request.
We received your request today, Tuesday 3 May 2022. We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than 31 May 2022, being 20 working days after the day your request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.
Your request is being handled by the Office of the Government Statistician and Chief Executive. If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me using the details in the signature below. If any additional factors come to light which are relevant to your request, please do not hesitate to contact us so these can be taken into account.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #19254 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: Kelsey Schaumann
Statistics New Zealand
Kia ora Andrew,
Following up on your Official Information Request: Stats NZ works closely
with and has regular communications with Customs NZ on many topics. Your
request, as it is currently framed, would be difficult to meet without
substantial collation. It would require a considerable amount of time and
manual effort to locate and prepare all documents within the scope of your
request.
Our initial exploratory scan of email communications between Stats NZ and
Customs NZ returned over 60,000 items which may be in scope. The time and
resources required to complete thorough searches, review all the search
results, and collate the final material, is substantial.
If your request could be refined or amended, to clarify the scope of your
request, it may expedite a response. We would therefore appreciate a
refinement of your request by 12 noon, Tuesday, 10 May 2022.
We do not believe an extension to the timeframe for this request would
reduce the impact on our staff, who would need to perform the extensive
research and collation. We also do not consider charging you for this
request to be a helpful solution, as temporary staff could neither perform
the necessary research or collation, nor back-fill specialist staff. Only
staff involved with the process would be suitably familiar with the
information you have requested, and many of them are specialists with
heavy workloads in the current circumstances. Stats NZ’s ability to
continue standard operations would hence be impaired, and we consider this
to be an inefficient use of resources."
Ngâ mihi,
Kelsey Schaumann (pronouns: she/her/hers)
Senior Advisor – Executive and Government Relations
Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa
DDI +64 4 931 4061 | [1]stats.govt.nz
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
[2]Facebook | [3]Twitter | [4]LinkedIn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
<[FYI request #19254 email]>
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2022 5:00 PM
To: Info Mailin - Shared Mailbox <[email address]>
Subject: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on
interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
This is a request for information under the Official Information Act.
On 12 April 2022, the department refused the Council’s request of 8
February 2022 (correspondence for which can be found here:
[5]https://fyi.org.nz/request/18491-stats-n...).
Please provide the Council with the following information:
1. A list of all email communications to and from any Statistics New
Zealand employee, secondee or contractor and any Customs New Zealand
employee, secondee or contractor for the period 1 May 2018 – 30 April
2022. This list should include the sent or received date, the email
account it was sent from or received by, the subject line and the
filenames of any documents attached to the email. Under section 16 of the
OIA, our preferred means of receiving this information is in tabular form
in spreadsheet or CSV format.
2. The contents of all emails identified by Statistics NZ in the list
generated when responding to item 1 above that relate to the following
topics:
a. Data sharing
b. Data ethics
c. Data security
d. Transparency
e. Data governance
f. Data management
g. The writing or circulation of advice, a paper, memo or guidance on
‘security vs transparency’
3. The attachments to any of the emails meeting the criteria
identified in items 1 and 2 above.
4. All email communications received by any Statistics NZ employee,
secondee or contractor from an employee, secondee or contractor of the NZ
Security Intelligence Service in the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022
relating to any of the terms identified in item 2 above.
5. All notes or other written material held by Statistics NZ of
meetings any of its employees, secondees or contractors have had with any
employees, secondees or contractors of the NZ Security Intelligence
Service for the period 1 April 2019 to 30 April 2022 relating to any of
the terms identified in item 2 above.
The Council looks forward to receiving the requested information as soon
as reasonably practicable and no later than 20 working days after receipt
of this request. Should the department need to discuss or clarify any
aspect of the request, please contact the Council by replying to the email
address from which this request was received.
Under section 16 of the OIA, our preference for receiving this information
is by email response to the address from which the department received
this request. Also under section 16 of the OIA, our preference is to
receive this information as searchable documents not image-only PDFs.
Further under section 16, our preference is for the information not to be
watermarked with ‘released under the OIA’ or similar text. The only
permitted reasons for not complying with the Council’s section 16
preferences are set out in section 16(2) of the Act.
Under section 19(a)(ii) of the OIA, if the department withholds any
information under sections 6 or 9 in its response to this request, we
further request that the department provide the Council with the grounds
underpinning the reasons for withholding that it cites.
Nâku noa, nâ
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FYI request #19254 email]
Is [Statistics New Zealand request email] the wrong address for Official Information requests
to Statistics New Zealand? If so, please contact us using this form:
[6]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[7]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
1. http://www.stats.govt.nz/
2. https://www.facebook.com/StatisticsNZ
3. https://twitter.com/Stats_NZ
4. https://www.linkedin.com/company/statist...
5. https://fyi.org.nz/request/18491-stats-n...)
6. https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
7. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
hide quoted sections
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Kia ora Kelsey,
The Council is working on a draft reply to your email regarding refinement or clarification of its request. We will respond substantively soon.
Yours sincerely,
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
Thank you for the email of 6 May 2022 from Ms Schaumann.
It appears that the department is considering refusal of the Council’s request under section 18(f) of the OIA, on the grounds of substantial collation or research in relation to part 1 of our request (since Ms Schaumann refers to both communication with Customs NZ and the number of emails which may be within the scope of the request).
The Council has some difficulty in accepting that this course of action is available to the department, for two reasons.
First, from emails Council members have received from Stats NZ, it appears that the department uses Outlook as its email client and Exchange as its mail server software. The Council would therefore be surprised if the department is not using MS365.
If this is the case Stats NZ will have access to Microsoft’s e-Discovery tools (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microso...).
The information provided by Microsoft about the e-Discovery functionality suggests that if Stats NZ does have access to these tools, it will be a straightforward task to compile the table of information concerning emails between Stats NZ and Customs NZ sought in part 1 of our request. It also suggests that it would be straightforward for the department to search within that set of emails for the search terms provided in part 2 of our request, and for the attachments requested in part 3.
As the Ombudsman notes on page 8 his guide to section 18(f) of the OIA (https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...),
“Agencies are required to create and maintain public records in an accessible form so they can be used for subsequent reference. Failure to comply with this requirement can make it more difficult to find and bring together information requested under the OIA or LGOIMA. Where the difficulty involved in meeting an official information request arises because of an agency’s own administrative failings, it may not be reasonable to refuse it on the grounds of substantial collation or research.”
The guide also states (p 27) that:
“The question under section 18(f) is whether an agency *can* make the information available without substantial collation or research, not whether it *should* be able to do so...
However, if the Ombudsman is sufficiently concerned that poor record-keeping practices have hindered an agency’s ability to meet an OIA request, they can notify the Chief Archivist under section 28(6) of the OIA (section 27(6) of the LGOIMA). The Chief Archivist can then take that information into account in exercising their functions under the Public Records Act 2005.” [emphasis in the original]
Second, the department refers to the work required to “review all the search results”. The Ombudsman’s guide to section 18(f) of the OIA explains that,
“Collation or research can also include reading and reviewing information, and consulting on the request, but *only* to the extent that these tasks are necessary in order to find what has been requested and bring it together.” [emphasis in the original]
The information requested in parts 1-4 should be possible to locate and collate using the tools described above. We are unclear what manual review of the search results is necessary, until the department proceeds to the subsequent stage of processing the request, considering any possible grounds to depart from the principle of availability. The Ombudsman’s guide is clear that time for reading material at that stage of the process cannot be included in any calculation of whether ‘substantial collation or research’ is needed:
“Time required to make a decision on withholding or release of information that has already been found and brought together does not go toward establishing ‘substantial collation or research’. Where the following tasks relate to decision making on withholding or release, they should not be taken into account:
• reading, review and assessment; and
• consultation (including consultation with legal advisors, or affected third parties); and
• redacting information that an agency has decided there is good reason to withhold.
As the High Court noted in Kelsey v the Minister of Trade, making a decision on an official information request requires each piece of information to be assessed against the criteria for withholding, and while that may involve substantial effort:
‘That ... is the price Parliament contemplated when it passed the Act and is a challenge regularly encountered and addressed by public servants who are charged with ensuring requests for official information are dealt with in accordance with the Act’."
If it is not possible to locate and collate the information within the scope of the request using the tools mentioned above, we would appreciate a detailed explanation from the department as to why this is the case. The Council would then be willing to consider amending of the scope of the request, or separating provision of the information so that it could be provided in stages (page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide refers).
Finally, the Ombudsman’s guide (p 16) indicates that agencies should consider carrying out “a sample exercise in order to be able to generate a reasonable estimate of the amount of work involved.” Please can you tell us whether the department has carried out a sample exercise, and if so, explain it to us (or provide the written results of it, whichever is the easier). We note that page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide states that,
“Giving *specific details* about the volume of information involved, the estimated time required to make it available, and the impact on the agency’s other operations will help the requester to understand the magnitude of the task, and may make them more willing to accept or suggest practical solutions to address the agency’s difficulty in meeting the request.” [emphasis added]
Kind regards,
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
From: Ruth Naude
Statistics New Zealand
Kia ora Andrew,
Thank you for your reply. As per Stats NZ's email to you on 6 May 2022, a search of emails between Stats NZ and Customs NZ for the period 1 May 2018 – 30 April 2022 returned over 60,000 emails. The search tool Stats NZ uses does identify emails with attachments but does not provide the filenames of any documents attached to the emails. In order for Stats NZ to provide you with the information in Item 1, a Stats NZ staff member will need to sight all the information that will be collated for producing the spreadsheet, then go into each individual identified email, which has an attachment/attachments to collate that information then add it to the spreadsheet. Item 1 of your request requires substantial collation and this will have to be done twice; once for email communication between Stats NZ and Customs NZ, and then a second time for email communication between Stats NZ and NZSIS.
In your request dated 2 May 2022, you asked for all emails from the list in Item 1 that related to seven topics. Stats NZ would have had to use multiple search terms, for each topic, in order to search for the requested information and then have to sight the content of each email to ensure all emails in the search were in scope of the request. In your reply dated 13 May 2022, you provided clarification that Item 2 was search terms and not topics. If this is the case, it will assist in the collation of information requested, however each email will still need to be sighted to determine if it is in scope of the OIA request.
Sighting of each email is necessary to determine scope. Before Stats NZ's reply to you on 6 May 2022, Stats NZ carried out a sample exercise using the topics, as search terms, provided in the OIA. Emails were randomly sampled from the list and were found to have content that was not relevant to the scope of the request.
Since your reply dated 13 May 2022, Stats NZ have run and refined an additional search using the search terms in Item 2. This search returned 524 emails and just under half have attachments in the emails, which still require substantial collation. Further refinement is essential to help clarify the scope of your request and may expedite a response. As a suggestion, you could refine your request so that Item 1 and Item 2 exclude meeting minutes and/or any key projects Stats NZ was involved in with Customs/NZSIS that is not relevant to your request.
Currently, four Stats NZ staff have been diverted from their original work to be involved in the research and collation required to determine the preliminary scope of this request. We do not consider charging you for this request to be a helpful solution because this work could not be done or back-filled by temporary staff; it can only be carried out by staff involved with the process who would be suitably familiar with the information you have requested. Stats NZ’s ability to continue standard operations would hence be impaired, and we consider this to be an inefficient use of resources. We also do not believe an extension to the timeframe for this request would reduce the impact on our staff, who would need to perform the extensive research and collation.
Please let us know before COB, Wednesday, 25 May 2022 whether you are prepared to amend or clarify your request and, if so, how.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua
Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-----Original Message-----
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties <[FOI #19254 email]>
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2022 1:30 PM
To: Info Mailin - Shared Mailbox <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
Thank you for the email of 6 May 2022 from Ms Schaumann.
It appears that the department is considering refusal of the Council’s request under section 18(f) of the OIA, on the grounds of substantial collation or research in relation to part 1 of our request (since Ms Schaumann refers to both communication with Customs NZ and the number of emails which may be within the scope of the request).
The Council has some difficulty in accepting that this course of action is available to the department, for two reasons.
First, from emails Council members have received from Stats NZ, it appears that the department uses Outlook as its email client and Exchange as its mail server software. The Council would therefore be surprised if the department is not using MS365.
If this is the case Stats NZ will have access to Microsoft’s e-Discovery tools (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microso...).
The information provided by Microsoft about the e-Discovery functionality suggests that if Stats NZ does have access to these tools, it will be a straightforward task to compile the table of information concerning emails between Stats NZ and Customs NZ sought in part 1 of our request. It also suggests that it would be straightforward for the department to search within that set of emails for the search terms provided in part 2 of our request, and for the attachments requested in part 3.
As the Ombudsman notes on page 8 his guide to section 18(f) of the OIA (https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...),
“Agencies are required to create and maintain public records in an accessible form so they can be used for subsequent reference. Failure to comply with this requirement can make it more difficult to find and bring together information requested under the OIA or LGOIMA. Where the difficulty involved in meeting an official information request arises because of an agency’s own administrative failings, it may not be reasonable to refuse it on the grounds of substantial collation or research.”
The guide also states (p 27) that:
“The question under section 18(f) is whether an agency *can* make the information available without substantial collation or research, not whether it *should* be able to do so...
However, if the Ombudsman is sufficiently concerned that poor record-keeping practices have hindered an agency’s ability to meet an OIA request, they can notify the Chief Archivist under section 28(6) of the OIA (section 27(6) of the LGOIMA). The Chief Archivist can then take that information into account in exercising their functions under the Public Records Act 2005.” [emphasis in the original]
Second, the department refers to the work required to “review all the search results”. The Ombudsman’s guide to section 18(f) of the OIA explains that,
“Collation or research can also include reading and reviewing information, and consulting on the request, but *only* to the extent that these tasks are necessary in order to find what has been requested and bring it together.” [emphasis in the original]
The information requested in parts 1-4 should be possible to locate and collate using the tools described above. We are unclear what manual review of the search results is necessary, until the department proceeds to the subsequent stage of processing the request, considering any possible grounds to depart from the principle of availability. The Ombudsman’s guide is clear that time for reading material at that stage of the process cannot be included in any calculation of whether ‘substantial collation or research’ is needed:
“Time required to make a decision on withholding or release of information that has already been found and brought together does not go toward establishing ‘substantial collation or research’. Where the following tasks relate to decision making on withholding or release, they should not be taken into account:
• reading, review and assessment; and
• consultation (including consultation with legal advisors, or affected third parties); and
• redacting information that an agency has decided there is good reason to withhold.
As the High Court noted in Kelsey v the Minister of Trade, making a decision on an official information request requires each piece of information to be assessed against the criteria for withholding, and while that may involve substantial effort:
‘That ... is the price Parliament contemplated when it passed the Act and is a challenge regularly encountered and addressed by public servants who are charged with ensuring requests for official information are dealt with in accordance with the Act’."
If it is not possible to locate and collate the information within the scope of the request using the tools mentioned above, we would appreciate a detailed explanation from the department as to why this is the case. The Council would then be willing to consider amending of the scope of the request, or separating provision of the information so that it could be provided in stages (page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide refers).
Finally, the Ombudsman’s guide (p 16) indicates that agencies should consider carrying out “a sample exercise in order to be able to generate a reasonable estimate of the amount of work involved.” Please can you tell us whether the department has carried out a sample exercise, and if so, explain it to us (or provide the written results of it, whichever is the easier). We note that page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide states that,
“Giving *specific details* about the volume of information involved, the estimated time required to make it available, and the impact on the agency’s other operations will help the requester to understand the magnitude of the task, and may make them more willing to accept or suggest practical solutions to address the agency’s difficulty in meeting the request.” [emphasis added]
Kind regards,
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #19254 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: Ruth Naude
Statistics New Zealand
OIA0357 A Ecclestone Stats NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re data issues final.pdf
208K
Download
View as HTML
Kia ora Andrew,
Please find attached Stats NZ’s response to your Official Information Act 1982 (OIA) request.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua
Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ruth Naude
Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2022 10:21 am
To: [FOI #19254 email]
Subject: FW: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Kia ora Andrew,
Thank you for your reply. As per Stats NZ's email to you on 6 May 2022, a search of emails between Stats NZ and Customs NZ for the period 1 May 2018 – 30 April 2022 returned over 60,000 emails. The search tool Stats NZ uses does identify emails with attachments but does not provide the filenames of any documents attached to the emails. In order for Stats NZ to provide you with the information in Item 1, a Stats NZ staff member will need to sight all the information that will be collated for producing the spreadsheet, then go into each individual identified email, which has an attachment/attachments to collate that information then add it to the spreadsheet. Item 1 of your request requires substantial collation and this will have to be done twice; once for email communication between Stats NZ and Customs NZ, and then a second time for email communication between Stats NZ and NZSIS.
In your request dated 2 May 2022, you asked for all emails from the list in Item 1 that related to seven topics. Stats NZ would have had to use multiple search terms, for each topic, in order to search for the requested information and then have to sight the content of each email to ensure all emails in the search were in scope of the request. In your reply dated 13 May 2022, you provided clarification that Item 2 was search terms and not topics. If this is the case, it will assist in the collation of information requested, however each email will still need to be sighted to determine if it is in scope of the OIA request.
Sighting of each email is necessary to determine scope. Before Stats NZ's reply to you on 6 May 2022, Stats NZ carried out a sample exercise using the topics, as search terms, provided in the OIA. Emails were randomly sampled from the list and were found to have content that was not relevant to the scope of the request.
Since your reply dated 13 May 2022, Stats NZ have run and refined an additional search using the search terms in Item 2. This search returned 524 emails and just under half have attachments in the emails, which still require substantial collation. Further refinement is essential to help clarify the scope of your request and may expedite a response. As a suggestion, you could refine your request so that Item 1 and Item 2 exclude meeting minutes and/or any key projects Stats NZ was involved in with Customs/NZSIS that is not relevant to your request.
Currently, four Stats NZ staff have been diverted from their original work to be involved in the research and collation required to determine the preliminary scope of this request. We do not consider charging you for this request to be a helpful solution because this work could not be done or back-filled by temporary staff; it can only be carried out by staff involved with the process who would be suitably familiar with the information you have requested. Stats NZ’s ability to continue standard operations would hence be impaired, and we consider this to be an inefficient use of resources. We also do not believe an extension to the timeframe for this request would reduce the impact on our staff, who would need to perform the extensive research and collation.
Please let us know before COB, Wednesday, 25 May 2022 whether you are prepared to amend or clarify your request and, if so, how.
Kind regards,
Ruth Naude
Senior Advisor | Kaitohutohu Matua
Executive and Government Relations - Office of the Chief Executive | Tari O Te Kaitatauranga Matua Me Te Pouārahi Matua Stats NZ | Tatauranga Aotearoa | stats.govt.nz | +64 4 931 4902 | +64 27 2359 503
About Aotearoa, for Aotearoa
Data that improves lives today and for generations to come
Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn
Work days: Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.
-----Original Message-----
From: New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties <[FOI #19254 email]>
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2022 1:30 PM
To: Info Mailin - Shared Mailbox <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Official Information request - Statistics NZ information on interactions with Customs and NZSIS re: data issues
Dear Statistics New Zealand,
Thank you for the email of 6 May 2022 from Ms Schaumann.
It appears that the department is considering refusal of the Council’s request under section 18(f) of the OIA, on the grounds of substantial collation or research in relation to part 1 of our request (since Ms Schaumann refers to both communication with Customs NZ and the number of emails which may be within the scope of the request).
The Council has some difficulty in accepting that this course of action is available to the department, for two reasons.
First, from emails Council members have received from Stats NZ, it appears that the department uses Outlook as its email client and Exchange as its mail server software. The Council would therefore be surprised if the department is not using MS365.
If this is the case Stats NZ will have access to Microsoft’s e-Discovery tools (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microso...).
The information provided by Microsoft about the e-Discovery functionality suggests that if Stats NZ does have access to these tools, it will be a straightforward task to compile the table of information concerning emails between Stats NZ and Customs NZ sought in part 1 of our request. It also suggests that it would be straightforward for the department to search within that set of emails for the search terms provided in part 2 of our request, and for the attachments requested in part 3.
As the Ombudsman notes on page 8 his guide to section 18(f) of the OIA (https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...),
“Agencies are required to create and maintain public records in an accessible form so they can be used for subsequent reference. Failure to comply with this requirement can make it more difficult to find and bring together information requested under the OIA or LGOIMA. Where the difficulty involved in meeting an official information request arises because of an agency’s own administrative failings, it may not be reasonable to refuse it on the grounds of substantial collation or research.”
The guide also states (p 27) that:
“The question under section 18(f) is whether an agency *can* make the information available without substantial collation or research, not whether it *should* be able to do so...
However, if the Ombudsman is sufficiently concerned that poor record-keeping practices have hindered an agency’s ability to meet an OIA request, they can notify the Chief Archivist under section 28(6) of the OIA (section 27(6) of the LGOIMA). The Chief Archivist can then take that information into account in exercising their functions under the Public Records Act 2005.” [emphasis in the original]
Second, the department refers to the work required to “review all the search results”. The Ombudsman’s guide to section 18(f) of the OIA explains that,
“Collation or research can also include reading and reviewing information, and consulting on the request, but *only* to the extent that these tasks are necessary in order to find what has been requested and bring it together.” [emphasis in the original]
The information requested in parts 1-4 should be possible to locate and collate using the tools described above. We are unclear what manual review of the search results is necessary, until the department proceeds to the subsequent stage of processing the request, considering any possible grounds to depart from the principle of availability. The Ombudsman’s guide is clear that time for reading material at that stage of the process cannot be included in any calculation of whether ‘substantial collation or research’ is needed:
“Time required to make a decision on withholding or release of information that has already been found and brought together does not go toward establishing ‘substantial collation or research’. Where the following tasks relate to decision making on withholding or release, they should not be taken into account:
• reading, review and assessment; and
• consultation (including consultation with legal advisors, or affected third parties); and
• redacting information that an agency has decided there is good reason to withhold.
As the High Court noted in Kelsey v the Minister of Trade, making a decision on an official information request requires each piece of information to be assessed against the criteria for withholding, and while that may involve substantial effort:
‘That ... is the price Parliament contemplated when it passed the Act and is a challenge regularly encountered and addressed by public servants who are charged with ensuring requests for official information are dealt with in accordance with the Act’."
If it is not possible to locate and collate the information within the scope of the request using the tools mentioned above, we would appreciate a detailed explanation from the department as to why this is the case. The Council would then be willing to consider amending of the scope of the request, or separating provision of the information so that it could be provided in stages (page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide refers).
Finally, the Ombudsman’s guide (p 16) indicates that agencies should consider carrying out “a sample exercise in order to be able to generate a reasonable estimate of the amount of work involved.” Please can you tell us whether the department has carried out a sample exercise, and if so, explain it to us (or provide the written results of it, whichever is the easier). We note that page 19 of the Ombudsman’s guide states that,
“Giving *specific details* about the volume of information involved, the estimated time required to make it available, and the impact on the agency’s other operations will help the requester to understand the magnitude of the task, and may make them more willing to accept or suggest practical solutions to address the agency’s difficulty in meeting the request.” [emphasis added]
Kind regards,
Andrew Ecclestone
Deputy Chair
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #19254 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
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
Stats NZ's processing of a previous OIA request and its search for the information requested
To Statistics New Zealand by New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Stats NZ discussion paper regarding the dimensions of security vs. transparency
To Statistics New Zealand by New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
Reasons for not performing a Privacy Impact Assessment on the Data and Statistics Bill
To Statistics New Zealand by New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties
