Dear Ministry for the Environment,

Please treat this as a request for official information under the Official Information Act 1982.

I am requesting information relating to the appointment, vetting, risk assessment, and capability evaluation processes for the following current senior roles within Tūmatakōkiri and People & Capability:

General Manager – Tūmatakōkiri (Hakarangi Tichborne)

Deputy Secretary – Tūmatakōkiri (Gina Rangi)

General Manager – People & Capability / HR (Tracey Kaio)

For each appointment (internal or external), please provide:

A. Appointment Process & Decision-Making Documents

The full appointment process documentation, including:

recruitment approach (internal, external, closed, open, direct appointment, acting)

shortlisting or selection records

interview records

panel membership

panel notes or assessment worksheets

assessment matrices or competency scoring

due diligence undertaken

referee checks

psychometric testing (if any)

appointment recommendation papers

approval documents (e.g., CE, DCE or PSC sign-off)

Any briefings, emails, memoranda, recommendations, or advice prepared for the CE, DCE, HR GM or others regarding the appointment decision.

Any PSC engagement where senior leadership roles required consultation or advice under the Public Service Act.

B. Risk Assessments & Conflict of Interest Checks

For each appointment:

Any risk assessments, including:

safety/leadership capability risks

psychosocial risk implications

previous conduct issues

conflict-of-interest declarations

integrity checks

any red flags raised at the time of appointment

analysis of suitability for people-leadership responsibility

Any documentation relating to:

prior allegations, complaints, or performance concerns

prior involvement in incidents relating to conduct or safety

how these were considered or mitigated in the appointment process

C. Training, Accreditation & Leadership Capability Framework

The leadership capability and competency requirements for each role.

Evidence of whether these were assessed.

Training or accreditation required or completed (e.g.,:

people-leadership training

conflict management

bullying/harassment frameworks

HSWA duties and psychosocial risk training

PSC model standards training)

Any documentation showing:

unmet training requirements

leadership development needs identified

risk mitigation actions recommended prior to appointment

D. Complaints, Concerns and Escalation History (Role-Related)

For each role:

Records of any complaints, concerns, allegations, or speaking-up matters raised before or during their tenure relating to:

bullying

harassment

discrimination

retaliation

procedural unfairness

unsafe leadership behaviour

integrity concerns

failures to follow HR, PSC or HSWA standards

How these concerns were:

triaged

recorded

escalated

investigated

resolved

Whether any concerns led to:

changes in duties

performance processes

disciplinary processes

restructuring or reassignment

risk mitigation actions

If any complaints or concerns were raised verbally, please provide any notes, emails, summaries, or managerial records relating to these.

E. HSWA Compliance Documentation (Leadership Appointments)

Any documentation assessing the HSWA s36 duty when appointing people leaders, specifically relating to:

psychosocial risk

foreseeable harm

suitability of managers to manage people

safety controls

post-appointment monitoring of risk

Any health & safety hazard registers that include:

leadership risk

people-leadership behaviours

complaints relating to harm

Any documentation showing:

risk flagged in Tūmatakōkiri

monitoring of leadership safety performance

interventions or controls put in place

F. Acting or Temporary Appointments

For any interim or acting leadership arrangements:

Appointment memos

Delegation of authority

Duties assigned

Risk assessments

Rationale for bypassing open recruitment (if applicable)

G. Limitations of Records

If any information requested does not exist, please confirm:

Why the Ministry does not hold it

Whether it was ever created

Whether it was destroyed

Whether it falls under the Ministry’s record-keeping obligations

How senior appointments can be made without the requested documentation

If any of the requested documents are already publicly available, please provide direct links to the exact documents or pages.

Urgent public interest considerations

I request, under section 12(3) of the Official Information Act, that this request be treated as urgent, for the reasons set out below.

This information should be treated as time-sensitive due to significant and ongoing public interest in:

• the integrity and transparency of senior public service appointments,
• leadership capability and suitability,
• the robustness of vetting, due diligence, and conflict-of-interest processes,
• compliance with PSC model standards, and
• how public agencies identify, assess, and manage leadership-related risks, including psychosocial risks under the Health and Safety at Work Act.

Recent national attention on public sector culture, governance, and staff safety has intensified scrutiny of:

• how leadership appointments are made,
• whether due diligence was sufficient,
• whether issues were known at appointment,
• whether complaints or concerns about leaders are appropriately handled, and
• how agencies ensure safe and lawful people-leadership practices.

These matters relate directly to:

public trust and confidence in the public service
the safe operation of public institutions
the protection of staff and the public
the proper use of public funds
the accountability of senior leaders

Information about senior appointments and risk controls is essential for public understanding of whether:

• leadership decisions are being made responsibly,
• governance risks are appropriately managed, and
• statutory duties under the Public Service Act, HSWA, and PSC standards are being properly discharged.

Given the elevated national conversation about leadership, safety, governance failures, and public sector integrity, timely transparency is in the public interest.

For these reasons, I request that the Ministry treat this request with priority and that any withholding be carefully weighed against the strong and urgent public interest in disclosure.

Yours faithfully,

Phoebe Robertson