27 May 2026
C212475
P Peach
[FYI request #34266 email]
Tēnā koe P Peach
Thank you for your request dated
27 March 2026 to the Department of Corrections – Ara
Poutama Aotearoa, requesting information about interpreting and translation services
procured by Corrections. Your request has been considered under the Official Information
Act 1982 (OIA).
Corrections currently manages more than 11,000 people in prison, and 25,000 people on a
community-based sentence or order. At any one time a proportion of people in Corrections’
management will be foreign nationals. When a person in prison identifies as a foreign
national, or where staff believe that they could be, they are advised of their rights under the
Corrections Act 2004. They are also advised of their rights under the Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations to have the diplomatic representative of their country advised of their
imprisonment and to have access to a consular representative.
It is this generally this group, or occasionally people who hold residency in New Zealand but
speak English as a second language, who would require translation services facilitated by
Corrections. Where a need is identified, Corrections uses telephone, video and in-person
interpreting services from the Ministry of Ethnic Communities (MEC) Open Syndicated
Agreement panel for interpreting services, and for written documents, translating services
are procured from the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA), who Corrections currently has a
terms and conditions agreement with. As of May 2026, a more formal arrangement with DIA
is currently being drafted.
Please note that when Corrections signed our participating agency agreement on 5 May
2025, the Ministry of Business, Employment and Innovation (MBIE) was the lead agency for
providing interpreting services. They ran procurement to establish panels and subsequently
created the agreements with Corrections. However, functions relating to interpreting
services subsequently transitioned to MEC as the lead agency. This work became business as
usual for MEC from 1 July 2025. Therefore, although MBIE was the agency that set up
Corrections’ services under this agreement, we understand that MEC is now the lead agency
who run this service.
NATIONAL OFFICE, WELLINGTON
Mayfair House, 44 – 52 The Terrace, Wellington, 6011, Private Box 1206, Wellington 6140,
Phone +64 4 460 3000
www.corrections.govt.nz
2
In preparing a response to your request, we have noted that many of your questions are
framed in relation to Corrections’ participation in the MEC Open Syndicated Agreement
panel for interpreting services, and our terms and conditions agreement with DIA for
translating services, but they effectively relate more closely to the functions of MEC and
DIA.
In this instance, we have not sought a transfer of your request to MEC or DIA under section
14 of the OIA. We note you made similar requests to MEC and DIA, and have received
responses from them directly. Therefore, we will answer your questions as they relate to
Corrections. We understand MEC’s and DIA’s responses to you provided more detailed
information in response to some parts of your request.
Please also note that if you have specific concerns or a complaint relating to interpreting
services used by Corrections, you are welcome to provide more information to Corrections
that would enable us to investigate. You can do so by writing t
o [Department of Corrections request email] or
by referring to the information available at this page:
https://www.corrections.govt.nz/about_us/getting_in_touch/complaint_resolution. Your requests are addressed in turn below. Please note that some of your questions have
been combined for ease of response. You requested:
SECTION A: SUBCONTRACTING ARRANGEMENTS
1. Whether Corrections' interpreting and translation providers are permitted to
subcontract assignments to third parties, including overseas-based agencies or
individual contractors located outside New Zealand.
2. Any conditions or restrictions in Corrections' contracts with interpreting and
translation providers regarding the use of subcontractors, including any
requirements that subcontractors be based in New Zealand or hold an
appropriate New Zealand work visa.
None of the interpreting and translating providers Corrections uses are permitted to
subcontract assignments to third parties without approval from the lead agency. The
telephone and video translating service Corrections uses from the MEC Open Syndicated
Agreement panel has offices and interpreters in Australia.
However, we have been advised that the agreement requires the proportion of calls
assigned to New Zealand resident Interpreters is 90%. This is reported monthly to the Lead
Agency.
3. Whether Corrections requires providers to disclose the identity, location, or
credentials of individual interpreters or translators — including subcontractors —
who carry out assignments on Corrections' behalf.
Corrections has not required providers to disclose any of this information about its
interpreters or translators. As noted above, Corrections uses interpreting services from the
MEC Open Syndicated Agreement panel and translating services through DIA, and therefore,
3
Corrections has not required providers to disclose any of this information about its
interpreters or translators.
4. Whether Corrections has any knowledge of, or has sought information about,
assignments being routed to interpreters or translators located outside New Zealand.
As noted above, the telephone and video interpreting service providers Corrections uses
through the MEC Open Syndicated Agreement panel has offices and interpreters in
Australia. Where an interpreter with the language skills being sought cannot be first sourced
within New Zealand, then the provider’s Australian based pool of interpreters will be utilised
to provide the service.
5. Any instances where Corrections became aware that an assignment was
conducted by a person located outside New Zealand or by an uncredentialled
subcontractor, and any action taken as a result.
Other than the circumstances outlined in the response to Question Four, no interpreter that
is located outside of New Zealand, or that is uncredentialled, has been used by Corrections.
SECTION B: NAATI CREDENTIAL COMPLIANCE
6. What mechanism, if any, Corrections uses to verify that individual interpreters
and translators carrying out assignments on its behalf — including those
engaged through subcontracting arrangements — hold a valid NAATI credential
or Working Towards NAATI (WTN) status.
Please refer to the response to Question Three.
7. Whether Corrections requires its interpreting and translation providers to
maintain and supply a current register of credentialled practitioners working
under Corrections contracts, and if so whether Corrections has received and
reviewed such registers.
Corrections, as a participating agency in the MEC Open Syndicated Agreement for its
interpreting needs, and translating needs through our agreement with DIA, does not require
additional assurance in this regard as MEC and DIA are the lead agency of these agreements.
8. Any audits, spot checks, or compliance reviews conducted by Corrections on its
interpreting and translation providers since 1 July 2024 to verify NAATI credential
compliance, including the methodology and findings of any such reviews.
Corrections has not conducted any audits or reviews of this kind. Therefore, this part of your
request is refused under section 18(e) of the OIA, as the document alleged to contain the
information requested does not exist.
As per section 18B of the OIA, we have considered whether consulting with you would
enable the request to be made in a form that would remove the reason for the
4
refusal. However, we do not consider that the request can be refined in this instance due to
the specific nature of the request.
9. Any instances since 1 July 2024 where a provider was found to have used an
interpreter or translator who did not hold the required NAATI credential or Working
Towards NAATI (WTN) status, and any consequences or remedial action taken.
Corrections is not aware of any instances where a non-NAATI credentialed interpreter was
used.
10. Any complaints received by Corrections since 1 July 2024 from staff, prisoners, or
members of the public regarding the qualifications or conduct of an interpreter or
translator engaged through Corrections' services.
Corrections is not aware of any complaints about the qualifications of any interpreter.
The only matter considered within scope of your request was a privacy concern, in which a
video-based interpreter service’s verification methods did not meet Corrections’
expectations to protect the privacy of prisoners and our staff. The provider modified their
practices to resolve the issue.
SECTION C: INTERPRETER AND TRANSLATOR PAY VISIBILITY
11. Whether Corrections has any information about the rates or fees paid by its
providers to individual interpreters or translators for assignments conducted on
Corrections' behalf.
This information is not specified within the MEC Open Syndicated Agreements of our
participating agency requirements for the interpreting services we use, and has not been
requested by, or provided to, Corrections.
12. Whether Corrections has ever sought, as part of contract negotiations, tendering
processes, or performance reviews, any information about the pay or working
conditions of interpreters or translators engaged through its provider contracts.
This has never been discussed with Corrections. As a participating agency to the MEC Open
Syndicated Agreements for all our interpreting services (telephone, video, face-to face, and
sign language), these are not matters Corrections has raised.
13. Any internal policies, briefings, risk assessments, or correspondence within
Corrections regarding the fair remuneration or employment conditions of interpreters
and translators working under its contracts, including any concerns raised about the
margin between rates paid to providers and rates passed on to practitioners.
14. Whether Corrections' tendering or procurement criteria for interpreting and
translation services include any consideration of whether providers pay practitioners
at or above a minimum rate, living wage, or industry standard.
5
Corrections does not hold any internal policies, risk assessments or correspondence
regarding the fair renumeration or employment conditions of interpreters and translators
working under its contracts. Corrections also does not hold any policies about the tendering
or procurement criteria for interpreting and translation services. Therefore, these parts of
your request are refused under section 18(e) of the OIA, as the document alleged to contain
the information requested does not exist.
As per section 18B of the OIA, we have considered whether consulting with you would
enable the request to be made in a form that would remove the reason for the
refusal. However, we do not consider that the request can be refined in this instance, due
to the specific nature of the request.
Please note that this response may be published on Corrections’ website. Typically,
responses are published quarterly or as otherwise determined. Your personal information
including name and contact details will be removed for publication.
If you have any concerns with this response, we encourage you to raise them with
Corrections. Alternatively, you have the right to make a complaint to the Ombudsman.
Information about how to do this is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or by
contacting them on 0800 802 602 or by post to the Office of the Ombudsman, PO Box
10152, Wellington 6143.
Ngā mihi
Alice Sciascia
Deputy Chief Executive
Strategy and Corporate Services
