This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Official Information request 'Submissions to Discussion Document: Strengthening New Zealand's Emergency Management Legislation'.

 
 
 
25 June 2025 
 
 
Steve Glassey 
[FYI request #31085 email] 
 
Reference: OIA-2024/25-0928 
Tēnā koe Steve, 
 
Official Information Act request relating to Consultation on Strengthening New 
Zealand's Emergency Management Legislation 
 
Thank you for your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request received on 25 May 2025. 
You requested: 
 
“[1] all submissions received on the “Discussion Document: Strengthening New 
Zealand's Emergency Management Legislation” 
 

[1a] to include public submissions up and until 21 May 2025, and  
[1b] final submissions made by stakeholder/government agencies or other 
organisations prior to the public consultation phase.  

 
[2] Additionally, please also supply any analysis data and reports that evidence how the 
public version of the discussion document was formulated 
 
[3] a copy of the related project plan be supplied.” 

 
For ease of reference, I have numbered and reformatted the parts of your request above. 
 
Part 1 
 
Part 1a of your request is refused under section 18(d) of the Act as the submissions will soon 
be publicly available here: https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-
sector/legislation/emergency-management-bill. 
 
 
Part 1b of your request is refused under section 18(g) of the Act as no submissions by other 
agencies, stakeholders, or organisations that predate the consultation period are held by 
NEMA, and I do not have reason to believe that these would be held by another agency or 
minister that is subject to the Act. 
 
Part 2 
 
On 30 May you clarified that the second part of your request is for, “a report (or product) […] 
that analysed the previous submissions (to the withdrawn EM Bill) and subsequent 
stakeholder input through a qualitative analysis/ethnographic content analysis or similar to 
ensure policy advice and recommendations are structured and evidence based.” 
 
You further advised that, “It would be helpful to understand what documents were used 
following the withdrawal of the EM Bill (2024) to inform the development of the Discussion 

 
Level 7, TSB Building, 147 Lambton Quay | PO Box 5010 | Wellington 6140 | New Zealand 
Tel: +64 4 830 5100 | [email address] | www.civildefence.govt.nz 
 


 
 
Document. For example, was a robust analysis using an accepted methodology used (simple 
spreadsheet thematic analysis, SPSS data sets), were submissions and feedback analyzed 
using AI, or was it organically written etc.” 
 
While  submissions  on  the  withdrawn  Bill  informed  the  development  of  the  subsequent 
Discussion Document, I can advise that no standalone report was prepared regarding these 
earlier  submissions,  nor  was  a  formal  methodology  employed.  Instead,  analysis  was 
conducted using preparatory, table-based approaches.  
 
Officials created thematic tables to collate the issues raised, intended to inform a Departmental 
Report for the 2024 Bill. However, as the Bill was ultimately withdrawn, this Report was not 
required. Thematic consolidation was therefore limited to two tables: one outlining substantive 
policy  issues,  and  the  other  capturing  potential  rewrite  issues  for  future  reference.  These 
thematic tables were designed for internal use and preparatory purposes only. 
 
In addition to submissions on the withdrawn Bill, the Discussion Document was also informed 
by reports generated from related inquiries and reviews, such as the NISWE Inquiry and TAG 
Review: 
 
•  Government Inquiry into the Response to the North Island Severe Weather Events - 
dia.govt.nz 
•  Ministerial Review: Better Responses to Natural Disasters and Other Emergencies in 
New Zealand | Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC).  
 
Part 3 
 
I note that while there is a project plan for the Emergency Management Bill itself, no discrete 
project  plan  for  the  Discussion  Document  exists.  I  am  therefore  refusing  this  part  of  your 
request under section 18(e) of the Act.  
 
You have the right to ask the Ombudsman to investigate and review my decision under section 
28(3) of the Act. 
 
This response will be published on the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s website 
during our regular publication cycle. Typically, information is released monthly, or as otherwise 
determined. Your personal information including name and contact details will be removed for 
publication.  
 
 
Nāku noa, nā, 
 
 
Stefan Weir  
Chief of Staff 
5021972