Investigations and Prosecutions under Maritime Transport Act 1994
Marie made this Official Information request to Marlborough District Council
This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Marie to read recent responses and update the status.
From: Marie
Dear Marlborough District Council,
Could you please provide the following:
1. Could you please advise of any investigations and prosecutions by your council under the Maritime Transport Act 1994 in the last 10 years (or timeframe that doesn’t invoke the too must work refusal clause).
2. Your internal procedures/manuals and other documents in relation to whether you investigate and prosecute or Maritime New Zealand does.
3. What is your understanding (any agreements or memorandum of understanding with Maritime New Zealand) on decisions and how those decisions are made as to whether you or Maritime NZ investigate recreational boating incidents.
4. Please provide your standard operating procedures for investigating and prosecuting under the Maritime Transport Act 1994 (or general if not specific).
5. Please provide the criteria used to determine if you investigate an recreation boating incident.
6. Please provide the code of conduct and conflict of interest policy in relation to your investigators. For example, if a victim and complainant in a recreational boat incident is a friend of one of your investigators or officers, and then they called your officer on a weekend, then went your officers house to complain about the incident and told your officer how angry they were about the other people on board, and their treatment etc…(when police and harbour master were already aware of the incident and choose not to act) would your officer then be able to recommend and lead an investigation into the accident including making recommendations to prosecute the people the officers friend was angry at? (This situation did not involve your council, or other councils, but was a situation with an officer from a govt department investigating an incident under the circumstances described). I am not trying to get an opinion, rather demonstrate the angle I am taking regards policies and documents that relate to this and would either allow or disallow that example to happen in your organisation.
Yours faithfully,
Marie
From: MDC
Marlborough District Council
Thank you for emailing the Marlborough District Council.
Your message will be processed and forwarded to the appropriate staff
member or department for action.
If your query or concern is urgent, please call our customer service line
on 03 520 7400 which is answered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
This email inbox is monitored between 8.00am and 5.00pm, Monday to Friday
(excluding public holidays).
Regards
Customer Services
Marlborough District Council
Phone 03 520 7400
[1]MDCOMBLUERGB
15 Seymour Street, PO Box 443
Blenheim 7240, New Zealand
[2][Marlborough District Council request email]
[3]www.marlborough.govt.nz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may contain
legally privileged material and is only for the use of the intended
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient then any use,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify us
immediately and delete the original message. This email does not
necessarily represent the views of the Marlborough District Council. Thank
you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[Marlborough District Council request email]
3. http://www.marlborough.govt.nz/
hide quoted sections
From: Tony Quirk-8077
Marlborough District Council
Marie, I refer to your email of 11 June and have responses to the 6
questions raised.
1. The Harbour Master has conducted one investigation for an offence
against the Marine Protection Rules this year. For this, information
was gathered and discussed with Maritime NZ (MNZ) and Council’s Legal
team. This incident was not taken to prosecution by MNZ. Inspection
of Council records do not disclose any other investigations under the
MTA.
The incident investigated showed a breach of the rules. For safety
matters, generally, it would be left for MNZ to investigate. Any decision
to investigate for Council would depend on the severity of the incident.
2. Council does not prosecute under the MTA. That is done by MNZ.
Council might consider infringements.
3. Council does not have an MOU with MNZ for investigations.
4. Council’s Legal team would guide any investigation.
5. Any decision to investigate for Council would be based on the
circumstances of each case.
6. Any conflicts of interest would involve consideration by Council’s
Legal team.
Tony Quirk
District Secretary
[1]A black text on a white background Description automatically generated
with medium confidence
Phone: 03 520 7400 | DDI: 03 520 7429
15 Seymour Street, PO Box 443
Blenheim 7240, New Zealand
[2][email address]
[3]www.marlborough.govt.nz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may contain
legally privileged material and is only for the use of the intended
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient then any use,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify us
immediately and delete the original message. This email does not
necessarily represent the views of the Marlborough District Council. Thank
you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.marlborough.govt.nz/
hide quoted sections
From: Marie
Dear Tony Quirk-8077,
Thank you Tony. So can you please confirm, if as you state, you do not prosecute under the MTA…. that Marlborough District Council did not prosecute 2 people from the incident in 2018 involving the Carpe Diem vessel, under the MTA for “dangerous activities involving ships” (most likely s65) as was reported. Did MNZ prosecute that case?
Yours sincerely,
Marie
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
CIP and director acceptance of Maritime officer enforcement recommendations
To Maritime New Zealand by Marie
