Regulatory Assessment Processes involved in assessing the Covid-19 Pfizer Contract
Nadine Connock made this Official Information request to Ministry of Health
Currently waiting for a response from Ministry of Health, they must respond promptly and normally no later than (details and exceptions).
From: Nadine Connock
Dear Ministry of Health,
Please provide all communications including but not limited to: emails; letters; reports; policy documentation; recommendations; decisions; assessments; and notifications between all Government departments including but not limited to: decision-making groups; Taskforce Committees; DPMC; MoH; MBIE; MPI; MFAT; EPA; Treasury; Medsafe; Pharmac; and any related agencies, that were involved in seeking any type of guidance or feedback; clarification or public policy recommendations; or international standards when assessing the following:
1) Implications of signing any contract indemnity stipulating a 'Hold harmless' indemnity clause.
2) Implications of, and guidelines for, a breach in any capacity of a 'Hold harmless' indemnity clause.
3) Questions, concerns, or raising objection to, the following statement:
Pursuant to section 65ZD(3) of the Public Finance Act 1989, the Minister of Finance
makes the following statement:
In September 2021 I, Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, on behalf of the Crown, gave
indemnities to Pfizer New Zealand Limited, Pfizer Inc and BioNTech and specific
associated persons, and to Spain and Denmark, in relation to the supply of a COVID-19
vaccine.
4) Implications related to and guidance for:
a) "There are no limitations on availability of the indemnification in the event of negligence or fraud on the part of the Suppliers."
b) "The representation that adequate authority and funding to fulfill the indemnification obligations"
c) The requirement to "satisfactorily demonstrate indemnification obligations in Suppliers’ sole discretion, with true and complete documentary support”.
5) Addressing matters of foreign interference; anti-bribery; fraud; bribery; or any security measures relating to regulatory assessment processes.
6) Addressing matters of conflicts of interests between Bell Gully as the legal advisory and other potential conflicts of interest.
Yours faithfully,
Nadine Connock
From: OIA Requests
Kia ora Nadine
Thank you for your request under the Official Information Act 1982 (the
Act), received by the Ministry of Health on 4 June 2025. You requested:
Please provide all communications including but not limited to: emails;
letters; reports; policy documentation; recommendations; decisions;
assessments; and notifications between all Government departments
including but not limited to: decision-making groups; Taskforce
Committees; DPMC; MoH; MBIE; MPI; MFAT; EPA; Treasury; Medsafe; Pharmac;
and any related agencies, that were involved in seeking any type of
guidance or feedback; clarification or public policy recommendations; or
international standards when assessing the following:
1) Implications of signing any contract indemnity stipulating a 'Hold
harmless' indemnity clause.
2) Implications of, and guidelines for, a breach in any capacity of a
'Hold harmless' indemnity clause.
3) Questions, concerns, or raising objection to, the following statement:
Pursuant to section 65ZD(3) of the Public Finance Act 1989, the Minister
of Finance
makes the following statement:
In September 2021 I, Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, on behalf of
the Crown, gave
indemnities to Pfizer New Zealand Limited, Pfizer Inc and BioNTech and
specific
associated persons, and to Spain and Denmark, in relation to the supply of
a COVID-19
vaccine.
4) Implications related to and guidance for:
a) "There are no limitations on availability of the indemnification in the
event of negligence or fraud on the part of the Suppliers."
b) "The representation that adequate authority and funding to fulfill the
indemnification obligations"
c) The requirement to "satisfactorily demonstrate indemnification
obligations in Suppliers’ sole discretion, with true and complete
documentary support”.
5) Addressing matters of foreign interference; anti-bribery; fraud;
bribery; or any security measures relating to regulatory assessment
processes.
6) Addressing matters of conflicts of interests between Bell Gully as the
legal advisory and other potential conflicts of interest.
The reference number for your request is H2025068094. As required under
the Act, the Ministry will endeavour to respond to your request no later
than 20 working days after the day your request was received:
http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/.
If you have any queries related to this request, please do not hesitate to
get in touch ([1][email address]).
Ngā mihi
OIA Services Team
[2]Ministry of Health information releases
show quoted sections
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://www.health.govt.nz/about-ministr...
From: OIA Requests
Kia ora Nadine,
Thank you for your request for official information received on 4 June
2025 requesting:
“Please provide all communications including but not limited to: emails;
letters; reports; policy documentation; recommendations; decisions;
assessments; and notifications between all Government departments
including but not limited to: decision-making groups; Taskforce
Committees; DPMC; MoH; MBIE; MPI; MFAT; EPA; Treasury; Medsafe; Pharmac;
and any related agencies, that were involved in seeking any type of
guidance or feedback; clarification or public policy recommendations; or
international standards when assessing the following:
1) Implications of signing any contract indemnity stipulating a 'Hold
harmless' indemnity clause.
2) Implications of, and guidelines for, a breach in any capacity of a
'Hold harmless' indemnity clause.
3) Questions, concerns, or raising objection to, the following statement:
Pursuant to section 65ZD(3) of the Public Finance Act 1989, the Minister
of Finance
makes the following statement:
In September 2021 I, Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, on behalf of
the Crown, gave
indemnities to Pfizer New Zealand Limited, Pfizer Inc and BioNTech and
specific
associated persons, and to Spain and Denmark, in relation to the supply of
a COVID-19
vaccine.
4) Implications related to and guidance for:
a) "There are no limitations on availability of the indemnification in the
event of negligence or fraud on the part of the Suppliers."
b) "The representation that adequate authority and funding to fulfill the
indemnification obligations"
c) The requirement to "satisfactorily demonstrate indemnification
obligations in Suppliers’ sole discretion, with true and complete
documentary support”.
5) Addressing matters of foreign interference; anti-bribery; fraud;
bribery; or any security measures relating to regulatory assessment
processes.
6) Addressing matters of conflicts of interests between Bell Gully as the
legal advisory and other potential conflicts of interest."
The Ministry of Health has decided to extend the period of time available
to respond to your request under section 15A of the Official Information
Act 1982 (the Act) as consultations necessary to make
a decision on the request are such that a proper response to the request cannot reasonably be made within the original time limit.
You can now expect a response to your request on, or before, 22 July
2025.
You have the right, under section 28 of the Act, to ask the Ombudsman to
review my decision to extend the time available to respond to your
request.
Ngâ mihi
OIA Services Team
Ministry of Health | Manatû Hauora
M[1]inistry of Health information releases
show quoted sections
References
Visible links
1. https://www.health.govt.nz/about-ministr...
From: OIA Requests
Kia ora,
Thank you for your request for official information received on 4 June
2025 for:
“1) Implications of signing any contract indemnity stipulating a 'Hold
harmless' indemnity clause.
2) Implications of, and guidelines for, a breach in any capacity of a
'Hold harmless' indemnity clause.
3) Questions, concerns, or raising objection to, the following statement:
Pursuant to section 65ZD(3) of the Public Finance Act 1989, the Minister
of Finance
makes the following statement:
In September 2021 I, Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, on behalf of
the Crown, gave
indemnities to Pfizer New Zealand Limited, Pfizer Inc and BioNTech and
specific
associated persons, and to Spain and Denmark, in relation to the supply of
a COVID-19
vaccine.”
We are contacting you to clarify part of your request.
Can you please advise if you are specifically looking for advice in
relation to any contract for the Pfizer Covid vaccine?
We look forward to receiving your response.
Ngâ mihi
OIA Services Team
Ministry of Health | Manatû Hauora
M[1]inistry of Health information releases
show quoted sections
References
Visible links
1. https://www.health.govt.nz/about-ministr...
From: Nadine Connock
Dear OIA Requests,
I have already said yes.
Yours sincerely,
Nadine Connock
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
Pfizer
To Grant Robertson by S Hill
Contingency Liability estimated for COVID-19 Vaccine Indemnity and/or Compensation for Injuries
To The Treasury by Chris Johnston
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
## 📌 Annotation for OIA #31214 – *Regulatory Assessment Processes Involved in Assessing the COVID-19 Pfizer Contract*
The Ministry of Health’s response dated **3 July 2025** (Ref: H2025067777) refused this request under **Section 18(f)** of the Official Information Act 1982, citing that the information requested—"all communications" relating to regulatory assessment of the Pfizer COVID-19 contract—would require *“substantial collation or research.”* While this is a procedurally valid ground under the Act, the response raises several transparency concerns that merit closer examination.
---
### 🔍 Key Issues Identified
#### ✅ **Procedural Validity**
* Section 18(f) permits refusal if responding would require unreasonable resource use. Given the request spans multiple agencies and a broad scope (“all communications”), the Ministry is within its rights to seek a refined request.
#### ⚠️ **Moderate Obfuscation**
* The Ministry **does not clarify** whether any documents exist, the volume or nature of records held, or whether a partial or high-level response (e.g., Cabinet briefings or Medsafe summaries) could have been reasonably provided.
* There is **no indication** that the Ministry considered releasing any documents administratively or under section 16 (partial release).
#### ⚠️ **Mild Misdirection**
* The Ministry does **not direct the requester** to any existing public resources or previously released documents, such as:
* The MoH’s vaccine procurement summary:
[https://www.health.govt.nz/about-ministr...(https://www.health.govt.nz/about-ministr...)
* Medsafe’s regulatory approval process:
[https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/COVID-19/med...(https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/COVID-19/med...)
#### ❌ **Lack of Transparency**
* The Ministry fails to confirm whether it holds documents relating to:
* The use of “hold harmless” indemnity clauses.
* Treasury or Cabinet involvement in Pfizer contract assessments.
* Bell Gully’s legal role and possible conflicts of interest.
* These omissions weaken public confidence in the transparency of pandemic-related procurement and oversight processes.
---
### 🔎 DeepSearch Findings: Regulatory Context
* Related OIAs (e.g. [#27792](https://fyi.org.nz/request/27792), [#27911](https://fyi.org.nz/request/27911), [#17415](https://fyi.org.nz/request/17415)) confirm that **contractual information relating to Pfizer has been repeatedly withheld** under s 9(2)(b)(ii) (commercial prejudice), 9(2)(ba)(ii) (confidentiality), and 9(2)(c) (public health interest).
* The **Ombudsman upheld** these redactions in 2023, citing international confidentiality agreements and pandemic diplomacy as justifications.
* However, the Ministry has **previously provided summaries** when requests were narrowed (e.g., vaccine indemnities [#22060](https://fyi.org.nz/request/22060), Medsafe consent [#17184](https://fyi.org.nz/request/17184))—suggesting more could have been disclosed here with minimal effort.
---
### 🧭 Recommendations for Requesters
If you're reviewing this request or considering a similar one, you might:
1. **Refine your request** by narrowing:
* Timeframe (e.g. “August 2020 – March 2021”),
* Agencies (e.g. “Medsafe and Treasury only”), or
* Document types (e.g. “briefings, memos, and legal advice on indemnity clauses”).
2. **Submit separate requests** to other agencies (e.g. Treasury, DPMC, Pharmac), as they may hold documents relevant to the Pfizer contract and indemnity decision-making.
3. **Ask for a partial release** or summary under section 16 of the OIA.
4. **Escalate** to the **Office of the Ombudsman** if you believe the Ministry has not met its good faith obligations to assist or failed to release information it holds:
[http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz](http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz)
---
### 🗣️ Public Interest Context
This request reflects growing public concern about transparency in vaccine procurement, especially around indemnities, liability waivers, and decision-making processes. Multiple related OIAs and media commentary reflect this. Although the Ministry’s refusal may be technically lawful, its **failure to assist proactively or release what it can** undermines trust in public accountability during a period of unprecedented public health intervention.
Link to this