Nigel Gray
Whare Kaupapa Atawhai | Conservation House
18 Manners Street, Wellington 6011
[FYI request #33802 email]
PO Box 10420, Wellington 6140
[email address]
28 May 2026
Ref: OIAD-6299
Tēnā koe Nigel
Thank you for your subsequent (and connected to OIAD-6124 (our reference)) request to the
Department of Conservation, received on 30 April 2026, in which you stated and asked for:
“ I am writing to request clarification and further information under the Official Information Act 1982.
This request is made in light of several statements in your response that require refinement to
ensure the Department’s decision is properly grounded in the Act.
1. Basis for Refusal Under Section 18(e)
Your response refused Parts 3 and 5 of my request under s 18(e) on the grounds that the
information “does not exist or, despite reasonable efforts to locate it, cannot be found.”
To assist me in understanding the Department’s decision, please provide:
1.1 Search Methodology
A description of the search steps undertaken for Parts 3 and 5, including:
•
teams, business units, and individuals consulted
•
search terms used
•
systems, databases, and document repositories checked
•
date ranges applied
•
any limitations or constraints on the search
This request concerns methodology only, not the content of any documents.
1.2 Definitions Applied
Please provide the Department’s working definitions of:
•
“external review”
•
“external input”
•
“approval by external parties”
•
“conflict-of-interest declaration”
as used when assessing Parts 3 and 5 of my request.
This is to understand how the Department distinguished between:
•
consultation
•
stakeholder engagement
•
inter-agency coordination, and
•
external influence over final public statements.
2. External Input Into Public Statements (Part 3)
Your response states: “this type of engagement is not considered to equate to public
statements.”
To ensure I correctly understand the Department’s position, please provide:
2.1 Clarification of Scope
The Department’s criteria for determining when:
•
external review,
•
suggested edits,
•
factual corrections, or
•
sign-off by another agency
does or does not constitute “external input” into a final public statement.
2.2 Inter-Agency Review
Confirmation of whether the Department excluded from scope any instances where:
MPI, MfE, Te Uru Rākau, regional councils, or other government agencies
reviewed or commented on DOC’s forestry-related public statements.
If excluded, please provide the basis for that exclusion.
3. Conflict-of-Interest Declarations (Part 5)
Your response states that no declarations were located.
To clarify this finding, please provide:
3.1 Registers and Systems
Whether the Department maintains:
•
conflict-of-interest registers,
•
annual declaration records,
•
onboarding declarations, or
•
project-specific conflict registers
for staff involved in:
•
forestry-related policy
•
compliance or enforcement
•
environmental monitoring
•
public communications relating to forestry
If such registers exist, please confirm whether they were searched.
3.2 Policy Framework
Copies of the Department’s policies or procedures governing:
•
when staff must declare conflicts of interest
•
how such declarations are recorded
•
where they are stored
•
who is responsible for maintaining the register(s)
4. Statutory Timeframe and Extensions
Your letter states: “more time is required to prepare the Department’s response for release.”
Please confirm:
Whether this constitutes a further extension under s 15A of the OIA.
If so, please provide the statutory ground(s) relied upon.
If not, please provide the legal basis for extending the timeframe beyond the date previously
notified.
5. Public Interest Considerations
Your response states that no public interest factors outweigh withholding.
5.1 Public Interest Assessment
The factors considered under s 9(1), including:
•
environmental impacts of forestry
•
erosion and sedimentation risks
•
transparency of public communications
2
•
external influence over official statements
•
accountability in regulatory and monitoring functions
and the reasons these were assessed as insufficient to outweigh withholding.
Administrative Notes
This request is made in good faith to ensure the Department’s decision is ful y understood and
properly grounded in the Act. It does not seek to revisit the substance of the original request, but to
clarify the reasoning and processes underlying the Department’s response. ”
We have considered your subsequent request under the Of icial Information Act 1982 (OIA).
Before proceeding to the Department’s response to your subsequent request, we have provided
some relevant contextual information and outlined our approach to this request.
Obligation to provide official information
As noted in our letter dated 5 May 2026, a distinction under the OIA exists between a request
for information already known to and held by an agency (official information); and a request to
an agency to form an opinion or provide an explanation or comment and thus create new
information to answer the request (not official information).
There is no obligation on an agency, such as the Department, to form an opinion, provide an
official position, or create information to answer a request or question – or respond to
commentary. Consequently, the Department’s responses wil generally not provide any
perspective or view and will be specific to fact only.
Further, the OIA is not an avenue for engagement, consultation or dialogue. It was not enacted
for this purpose.
Guidance for approach to responding to OIA requests
The provisions of the OIA, and guidance from and decisions of the Of ice of the Ombudsman
(Ombudsman), inform and support the approach that the Department takes in dealing with the
OIA requests that it receives. For completeness, we include the following links:
•
Of icial Information Act 1982 | New Zealand Legislation |
https:/ www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1982/156/en/latest/#DLM65396
•
Ombudsman New Zealand | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata |
https:/ www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/
Decision on an OIA request and release of information
The legal requirements for responding to requests for official information are to:
•
make a decision and communicate it to the requester
‘as soon as reasonably practicable’
and no later than twenty (20) working days after the request is received; and
•
make available any official information it has decided to release without
‘undue delay’.
The reference to twenty (20) working days in the OIA is a maximum - unless the timeframe is
extended within the grounds available in the OIA.
3
Generally, when a decision is made to grant a request for information, whether in full or in part,
the decision and the information should be provided to the requester at the same time.
However, there may be times when this is not possible. For example, when the request is for a
large amount of information or a large amount of information has had to be reviewed and
although the Department has reached a decision to grant the request, it wil stil take the
Department further time to prepare the information for release. The information may be provided
to the requester at a later stage, after the decision has been made and communicated. In these
circumstances, the notice of the decision should clearly indicate that the information wil be
provided at a later date, and where possible with an estimated timeframe for the release.
If some of the information is to be withheld, the notice of the decision should also advise this
and state the reasons for refusal of that part of the request.
Approach to this request
Your subsequent request was received following the Department's part response and decision
letter dated 30 April 2026, and before the remaining part of the Department of Conservation’s
response to your request was sent to you on 5 May 2026. These Departmental letters were in
respect of OIAD-6124 (our reference).
Consequently, there may be some overlap with the information supplied in this response letter
and the Department’s letter dated 5 May 2026.
Please note that the Department’s response only considers policies, processes, registers and
systems currently in place in providing information for this response letter.
In addition to determining what information it holds, the Department must also decide how the
information wil be released. Section 16 of the OIA allows information to be made available in
several ways in response to a request.
Information can be provided in a narrative and/or summarised form where not doing so would
unreasonably impact the normal functions of the agency responding. Please note the
Department has decided to provide certain information you have requested in these forms.
Limits to information available
As advised earlier (OIAD-6124), the Department’s approach to the native forests it administers
and manages is not the same as planted production forest. Work is usually focused and/or
connected to conservation, protection, restoration, sustainable use, pest control, climate change
and/or carbon storage.
Consequently, it took some time to research and review the Department’s records across
relevant teams to identify what may be held by the Department within scope of the five parts
making up your request (OIAD-6124).
While every effort was made to identify and provide you with what the Department holds given
our approach to your request, we note limitations to the availability of information for a range of
reasons. Over time there have been revised policies and processes, different record keeping
4
practices (including naming protocols), new information management systems, and staff
turnover.
As well, the search engine connected to the Department’s current information management
system produced results in the hundreds, depending on the search terms used (that proved to
include a number of false positives).
Department’s response to your subsequent request
When approaching OIAD-6124, the Department noted your interest in external influence(s) over
public communication and decision-making with respect to the forestry industry and
engagement with forestry-sector representatives. When determining what the forestry industry
means in a New Zealand context and how this applied to official information held by the
Department, these interests were taken into account, along with the way you had set out the
five parts forming your request. This allowed us to respond, as otherwise a wider interpretation
would have amounted to substantial collation and research, and we would therefore have had to
refuse that request under section 18(f) of the OIA.
Your subsequent request is comprised of five parts, as follows.
1 Basis for refusal of parts (3 and 5) of request under section 18(e) of the OIA – Search
methodology and definitions
The teams involved in undertaking searches for relevant material in response to OIAD-6124
included Flora and Ecosystems, Terrestrial Biodiversity, Freshwater, Policy,
Threats Science, Landscape Threats, and Climate Change. There was some general
liaison with Regional Operations.
Key search terms were drawn from your request. These included forestry, forestry slash
event; forestry and erosion; forestry and sedimentation and forestry-related environmental
impacts.
The date range used was 1 January 2021 to 22 February 2026 (being the date of your
request).
The Department’s approach to the native forests it administers and manages is not the
same as planted production forest. Work is usually focused and/or connected to
conservation, protection, restoration, sustainable use, pest control, climate change and/or
carbon storage. This approach, as noted earlier, does not lend itself to much work or
material of the type the forestry sector would be engaged in.
Consequently, it took some time to research and review the Department’s records across
relevant teams to identify what may be held by the Department within scope of the five
parts making up your request.
As noted before and above, there were limits to the availability of information.
The working definitions of various terms, such as those listed by you, is determined by
nature and type of work being undertaken. Standard dictionary definitions would be a
5
starting point, with consideration taken of definitions in relevant policies, guidance and
legislative measures.
2 External Input Into Public Statements (Part 3) - Scope
While the Department does consult and/or inform other parties where our work affects
them, the information and documents related to this type of engagement would not equate
to ‘public statements’ - noting the type of information you listed for this part of your request
(OIAD-6124).
As noted earlier, we limited our response to public statements relating to forestry issued
solely by the Department that involved review, editing or approval by external parties. None
were identified.
The extent and nature of engagement and/or consultation undertaken by the Department is
governed by a mix of legislative measures and current policy, depending on the matter.
Identification of affected stakeholders is also typically determined in a similar manner.
There is due consideration of views submitted from across the spectrum of interested parties
with respect to a range of issues, when engagement or consultation is undertaken. It is
recognised however that, for a range of reasons, decisions made by the Department concerning
(and/or approaches to) an issue may result in some parties seeking to express their dissent or
dissatisfaction.
The right of individuals and groups to raise and/or discuss the issues that are important to them
and the Department is respected. This right however does not extend to re-litigation of
determined matters, or further dialogue where a consensus is unlikely in the face of widely
disparate views – particularly where existing scientific evidence, research and monitoring
supports the decisions and/or position the Department has taken.
Not every action of the Department is subject to the need to engage with the public. Such an
approach would severely limit the ability of the Department to undertake its functions, which
include managing all land and resources held under the Conservation Act 1987.
The Department administers 25 pieces of legislation and has functions under others - including
the Resource Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Acts 1983 and 1996, the Biosecurity Act
1993, the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 and the Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998.
See:
https:/ www.doc.govt.nz/about-us/our-role/legislation/
There presently exists a number of ways that New Zealanders can submit their views or engage
on and/or get involved with conservation-related matters that are within the Department’s remit.
In particular, please refer to:
Have your say: Get involved | https://www.doc.govt.nz/get-
involved/have-your-say/
3 Conflict of Interest Declarations (Part 5) – Registers, Systems and Policy Framework
The Department does maintain the type of registers, records, declarations and registers you
have outlined.
6
The search undertaken used the terms in your request and not the expanded terms
contained in this request.
As noted above and/or set out in the Department’s letter dated 5 May 2026:
• The Department’s approach to the native forests it administers and manages is not
the same as planted production forest.
• Work is usually focused and/or connected to conservation, protection, restoration,
sustainable use, pest control, climate change and/or carbon storage.
• A search was undertaken to locate declared conflicts of interest by staff of the type
you expressed an interest in - that is, staff involved in forestry‑related policy;
forestry compliance or enforcement; environmental monitoring relating to forestry;
or forestry‑related public communications. None were located.
In terms of conflicts of interest, rather than provide a range of documents (in whole or in
part), we note that there is information available to all Departmental staff concerning what a
conflict of interest is, why it matters and how to declare and manage it at the Department.
This information canvasses actual, potential and perceived conflicts. It also links further
resources that are publicly available from the Public Service Commission and the Office of
the Auditor-General.
There is an annual conflict of interest process that applies to all Departmental staff.
As well, there are other key times when conflict of interest declarations are encouraged:
• Procurement, contract, and supplier management
• HR processes;
• Employment interests (before, after, or future)
• Grant funding and sponsorship engagement
• Conservation or commercial concessions
• Land, asset, or resource management
• Research and scientific collaboration
• Board, commit ee, or panel memberships
• Gift, hospitality, or benefit offers
4 Statutory Timeframe and Extensions – Notices of Decision and Information release
Our letter dated 30 April 2026 provided a part response (that is, refusals connected to two
parts (3 and 5) of your request) and notice of the Department’s decision on the remaining
parts (1, 2 and 4).
The Department’s letter dated 5 May 2026 provided relevant contextual information, further
details related to the refusals and responses to the remaining parts of the request.
As outlined above, the approach taken in the circumstances by the Department is one
allowed for by the OIA. It is also supported by guidance issued by the Ombudsman.
For example, s
ee The OIA for Ministers and agencies: A guide to processing official
information requests | Ombudsman New Zealand |
7
https:/ www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/resources/oia-ministers-and-agencies-guide-
processing-official-information-requests
5 Public Interest Assessment
Public interest considerations are taken into account when information is withheld under the
reasons available under section 9 of the OIA.
Other reasons exist for withholding information (such as section 6 of the OIA) and refusing
requests (section 18 of the OIA).
Of the information released, very limited withholding by redaction was applied. Most was
for the protection of privacy for which the Department wil tend to err on the side of caution
– particularly where names and contact details of individuals is not material to the
OIA request and the information that has been sought.
Notably, the Department does take note and consider Ombudsman guidance in this regard:
Public interest: A guide to the public interest test | Ombudsman New Zealand |
https:/ www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/resources/public-interest-guide-public-interest-test
You are entitled to seek an investigation and review of my decision by writing to an Ombudsman
as provided by section 28(3) of the OIA.
Please note that this letter (with your personal details removed) may be published on the
Department’s website.
Nāku noa, nā
Andrew Martin
Acting Director, Governance and Government Services
Department of Conservation
| Te Papa Atawhai
8
