8 June 2026
File Ref: OIAPR-1274023063-50359
Miss M Quicken
By email:
[FYI request #34667 email]
Tēnā koe Miss Quicken
Request for information 2026-203
I refer to your request for information dated 9 May 2026, which was received by Greater
Wellington Regional Council (Greater Wellington) on 9 May 2026. You have requested the
following in regards to Wellington Bus and Rail Signage Contract & KPIs:
“Dear Wellington Regional Council, This was 10yr exclusive single-provider contract worth $8.4 M of maintenance services. I am wondering from procurement research perspective, Why GWRC is not using a panel of suppliers for sign writing instead of using a single exclusive
provider and for such a long time? Please provide: A) The RFP that resulted into the contract B) The contract C) The associated procurement plan I wonder what does the council actually get for the $8.4M here. Does this buy dedicated human resources exclusively working to install & maintain the signs? In that case why did the GWRC chose to outsource this instead of employ directly given such
long period contract where this could be seen as core function of the council? And single commercial provider for all of it?”
Greater Wellington’s response follows:
Your request has been assessed under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings
Act 1987 (the Act).
Wellington office
Upper Hutt
Masterton office
0800 496 734
PO Box 11646
PO Box 40847
PO Box 41
www.gw.govt.nz
Manners St, Wel ington
1056 Fergusson Drive
Masterton 5840
[Wellington Regional Council request email]
6142
Why GWRC is not using a panel of suppliers for sign writing instead of using a single
exclusive provider and for such a long time?
Greater Wellington considered different delivery models during the procurement process. A
single supplier was selected as it was assessed as providing the best overall value for money
and operational efficiency for the services required.
Appointing a single supplier enables clear accountability, consistent quality, streamlined
contract management, and reduced administrative overhead compared with managing
multiple suppliers. It also allows the provider to invest in the necessary capability, systems, and
equipment to deliver the full scope of services efficiently over the term of the contract. Based
on market engagement, Greater Wellington was satisfied that there was sufficient supplier
capability to support a competitive process and that a single-supplier model would best meet
service, risk, and cost objectives.
a. The RFP that resulted into the contract
Please refer to
attachments 1-2 which contains the Signage RFP our requirements form, and
the RFP response form.
b. The contract
Please refer to
attachment 3.
We have withheld personal information relating to signatures of our staff and staff from Dzine
Signs and the names, titles, phone numbers, and email address’ of staff from Dzine signs under
section 7(2)(a) of the Act in order to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of
deceased natural persons.
We have also withheld proprietary information, recipes and techniques that form part of Dzine
Signs Intellectual Property, and the cost of the services under section 7(2)(b)(ii) of the Act as the
release of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position
of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information
When withholding information under these sections we are required to consider the public
interest in the release of the information. We have considered this and do not believe that the
public interest outweighs our decision to withhold the information.
Where we have made redactions, we have indicated what section these have been made under
on the documents.
Page 2 of 4
c. The associated procurement plan
Please refer to
attachment 4 which contains a copy of the procurement plan.
We have withheld signatures of our staff and external organisations staff, and the names and
titles of external organisation staff under section 7(2)(a) of the Act in order to protect the privacy
of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.
We have also withheld information relating to Greater Wellington budgets and the estimated
cost of the services under section 7(2)(b)(ii) of the Act as the release of the information would
be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who
is the subject of the information
When withholding information under these sections we are required to consider the public
interest in the release of the information. We have considered this and do not believe that the
public interest outweighs our decision to withhold the information.
Where we have made redactions, we have indicated what section these have been made under
on the documents.
I wonder what does the council actually get for the $8.4M here
Greater Wellington established an estimate, based on historic spending, for a five-year term
and multiplied this twice to get a 10 year. This contract covers all of Greater Wellington’s
signage needs.
This includes all signage requirements for Metlink (bus, rail & ferry use cases), regional parks,
environmental and all other associated signage needs.
Does this buy dedicated human resources exclusively working to install & maintain the
signs?
No.
In that case why did the GWRC chose to outsource this instead of employ directly given
such long period contract where this could be seen as core function of the council?
Establishing and maintaining this capability inhouse would require significant upfront
investment in plant, systems, and specialised staff, as well as ongoing costs regardless of
workload. Outsourcing provides greater flexibility to respond to changing service requirements
and ensures access to established industry capability, processes, and technology.
Page 3 of 4
On this basis, Greater Wellington considered that outsourcing the service would achieve better
value for money, reduce operational risk, and ensure consistent delivery standards, and that
these activities are more effectively delivered by a specialist supplier rather than as a core in-
house function.
And single commercial provider for all of it?
As mentioned above the single supplier was selected as it was assessed as providing the best
overall value for money and operational efficiency for the services required.
The contract also includes standard commercial provisions that allow Greater Wellington to
manage performance and risk, including review points and the ability to take corrective action
or terminate the agreement if service levels are not met. These mechanisms ensure that, while
a single provider delivers the services, Greater Wellington retains appropriate oversight and
control throughout the term of the contract.
If you have any concerns with the decision(s) referred to in this letter, you have the right to
request an investigation and review by the Ombudsman under section 27(3) of the Act.
Please note that it is our policy to proactively release our responses to official information
requests where appropriate. Our response to your request will be published shortly on Greater
Wellington’s website with your personal information removed.
Nāku iti noa, nā
Fiona Abbott
Kaiwhakahaere Matua Waka-ā-atea | Group Manager Metlink (Acting)
Page 4 of 4
