6 July 2026
Wayne Scott
Sent via email to
[FYI request #34863 email]
Request for Official Information
LG26-0193 - Snow Chain and Winter Driving
Dear Wayne,
Thank you for your request for information held by the Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC). On
6 June 2026 you requested the following information under the Local Government Official Information
and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA):
This request relates to any QLDC requirement, policy, procedure, delegation, operational
arrangement or contractor instruction concerning when snow chains are required to be fitted to
vehicles on roads within QLDC’s district, including roads providing access to ski fields where QLDC
has any role, responsibility, involvement or influence.
1. The current policy, rule, procedure, delegation, contractor instruction or operational
guidance that sets out when snow chains must be fitted to vehicles.
2. The defined criteria used to decide when chains are required. For example, whether the
decision is based on snow depth, ice, road surface temperature, weather conditions, vehicle
type, road gradient, crash risk, Police advice, contractor advice, ski field advice or any other
objective criteria.
3. Any documents that explain who has authority to require motorists to fit chains, including
whether that authority sits with QLDC staff, contractors, ski field staff, Police or any other
party.
4. Any delegations, contracts, memoranda of understanding, agreements or operational
arrangements that give contractors or ski field staff authority to direct motorists to fit
chains.
5. Any training material, induction material, qualifications, standard operating procedures or
competency requirements for contractors, ski field staff or any other people who make
decisions about requiring motorists to fit chains.
6. What legal mechanism is being utilised to grant staff of a private company to instruct
members of the public to utilise snow chains on a public road.
7. Any risk assessments, health and safety assessments, legal advice, engineering advice or
operational reviews relating to the decision to require chains.
8. Any records, reports, emails, meeting notes or briefings from the last five years that discuss
whether snow chains should be required, when they should be required and who should
make that decision.
9. Any investigation, assessment or advice undertaken by QLDC regarding the use of snow
tyres or winter tyres as an alternative to chains.
10. Any records that explain why the benefits of snow tyres or winter tyres have not been
adopted into QLDC’s chain requirement system, if that is the case.
11. Any consideration given to a simple identification system for vehicles fitted with recognised
winter tyres, such as a user pays sticker, permit or other visible approval system.
12. Any correspondence between QLDC and ski field operators, contractors, Police, Waka
Kotahi, insurers or road safety advisers regarding snow chains, snow tyres, winter driving
requirements or access road safety.
QLDC RESPONSE
In response to your request, the QLDC Policy Team, the QLDC Roading Operation and Contracts, the
QLDC Strategic Asset Management Team and the Downer Team (external) were consulted.
Decision to release information – Items 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 (in part), 8, 9, 10 and 11
1. The current policy, rule, procedure, delegation, contractor instruction or operational
guidance that sets out when snow chains must be fitted to vehicles.
QLDC has delegated the authority to determine when motorists must fit snow chains to its road
maintenance contractor, ski field staff (for Coronet Peak Road), and the New Zealand Police.
3. Any documents that explain who has authority to require motorists to fit chains, including
whether that authority sits with QLDC staff, contractors, ski field staff, Police or any other
party.
QLDC, as a road controlling authority, has broad powers under:
• The
Local Government Act 1974; • Section 22AB of the
Land Transport Act 1998 (which empowers council to create bylaws to
manage public safety on local roads);
•
Local Government Act 2002; •
Land Transport Act 1998, such as section 113; and
•
Road User Rules which detail various implementation focused rules, such as empowering
authorised officers to remove vehicles in the interest of public safety, and the display of
traffic controls (such as ‘variable’ traffic signage) through instruments such as the
Traffic
Control Devices Rule 2004.
The
QLDC’s Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2025 outlines how these powers are exercised, while the
QLDC's
Delegations Register sets out the Council's delegations under various pieces of legislation.
Under the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2025, the authority to impose temporary conditions on the use
of roads in the interest of public safety is delegated to the Chief Executive. Under the QLDC
Delegations Register, the Chief Executive has further delegated this authority to the QLDC
Roading and Contracts Manager.
4. Any delegations, contracts, memoranda of understanding, agreements or operational
arrangements that give contractors or ski field staff authority to direct motorists to fit
chains.
QLDC's role is limited to roads for which it has responsibility as a Territorial Local Authority and Road
Controlling Authority. For example, the access road to Coronet Peak is a local authority road and is
subject to the relevant bylaw and legislation.
Other ski field access roads, including those serving the Remarkables Ski Area, Snow Farm, Cardrona
and Treble Cone, are private roads. They are not local authority roads, are not under QLDC’s control,
and are subject to separate ownership and operational arrangements.
QLDC has contractual arrangements with its roading maintenance contractor for the management
of all local roads in the district, including the Crown Range Road. Under these arrangements, the
contractor is responsible for monitoring road conditions and undertaking operational responses
necessary to maintain road safety, including recommending road closures or the activation of
temporary traffic management measures and Variable Message Signage (VMS) where conditions are
unsafe.
VMS on the Crown Range Road are used to communicate road conditions in the interest of public
safety, including the requirement to fit snow chains. Classes of vehicles which are not using chains
are temporarily restricted when signage is erected. The
Land Transport Act 1998 and local bylaws
allow for the erection of signs as evidence of a traffic control, and this is supported by guides such as
the Traffic Control Devices manual (overseen by New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi
(NZTA)). QLDC also undertakes wider communications and updates to inform motorists via other
channels such as social media or issued road reports.
6. What legal mechanism is being utilised to grant staff of a private company to instruct
members of the public to utilise snow chains on a public road.
Please refer to the responses provided to items 3 and 4 of your request.
7. Any risk assessments, health and safety assessments, legal advice, engineering advice or
operational reviews relating to the decision to require chains.
The snow chains control was introduced by request of local Roading Police. Risk, health and safety
assessments on the decision, such as the problem definition, are provided in relevant Council
workshop material and reports listed below. These records primarily identified the need to update the
requirements to improve road safety:
•
Public Engagement on the draft bylaw •
Hearing report for public deliberation •
Adoption of draft bylaw (27 November 2025)
•
The Traffic and Parking Bylaw Options report and workshop presentation
Please find attached
photo evidence of non-compliance provided by Downer, particularly regarding
issues on the Crown Range with motorists refusing to fit snow chains, endangering workers clearing
the road by ignoring road closures and snow chain requirements.
Additionally,
operational advice was provided by the Police and verbal advice on the introduction of
the infringement was sought from officers at the Ministry of Justice officers and the New Zealand Code
of Offences.
Certain information within these records has been redacted, with the reasons for these redactions
outlined below.
Note that the enclosed links will expire on 30 July 2026, 2:25 pm (UTC+12:00) New Zealand Time.
8. Any records, reports, emails, meeting notes or briefings from the last five years that discuss
whether snow chains should be required, when they should be required and who should
make that decision.
Please refer to the documents provided in response to item 7 of your request.
9. Any investigation, assessment or advice undertaken by QLDC regarding the use of snow
tyres or winter tyres as an alternative to chains.
The use of winter tyres was considered during the development of the bylaw provisions. However, it
was concluded that recognising winter tyres as an alternative to snow chains would present practical
enforcement challenges. Verifying compliance would require inspection of all four tyres and
assessment against the relevant standards, which would need a level of technical expertise that may
not be readily available during roadside checks.
QLDC considered that dedicated winter tyres are not widely used in New Zealand and that snow chains
provide a more visible and readily enforceable means of ensuring vehicles are equipped for winter
driving conditions. In addition, issues of practical enforcement of the control, and low usage of
dedicated of winter tyres in New Zealand generally, remain significant barriers in justifying a bespoke
regulatory framework.
10. Any records that explain why the benefits of snow tyres or winter tyres have not been
adopted into QLDC’s chain requirement system, if that is the case.
Please refer to the response provided to item 9 of your request.
11. Any consideration given to a simple identification system for vehicles fitted with recognised
winter tyres, such as a user pays sticker, permit or other visible approval system.
Please refer to the response provided to item 9 of your request.
Consultation with the requester
12. Any correspondence between QLDC and ski field operators, contractors, Police, Waka
Kotahi, insurers or road safety advisers regarding snow chains, snow tyres, winter driving
requirements or access road safety.
QLDC regularly engages with a range of partner organisations on road safety matters, including the
Police, contractors, Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), NZTA, ski fields operations,
Rental Vehicle Association and the Small Passenger Service Association.
QLDC searched its email records for relevant correspondence. The search included the term ‘snow
chains’. This search initially identified
14,323 emails which, after removal of duplicates, will require
review to determine whether they fall within the scope of your request.
Your request as currently framed would be very difficult to meet without substantial collation or
research. It involves a considerable amount of information, and responding in its present form would
place a considerable strain on QLDC’s operations.
QLDC has considered whether charging a fee or extending the response timeframe, as required under
section 17(f) of the LGOIMA, would assist in meeting your request. However, QLDC has determined
that neither charging nor extending the timeframe would help in this situation. Extending the
timeframe would not alleviate the operational challenges QLDC faces, and charging would not address
the underlying issue of resource constraints in processing such a large volume of information.
Therefore, neither charging nor an extension would effectively resolve the issue.
Accordingly, unless your request is refined, QLDC may need to refuse it under section 17(f) of the
LGOIMA, on the basis that the information requested cannot be made available without substantial
collation or research.
To assist QLDC in providing a meaningful response, you may wish to refine your request by considering
one or more of the following:
• Date range: Further limiting the information to materials created or received between [insert
specific start date] and [insert end date].
• Correspondence parties: Further limiting correspondence to those involving [insert relevant
staff names or roles, for example: QLDC Policy Advisor, QLDC Roading Operations Manager,
or identified external facilities].
• Focus areas: Identifying areas of particular interest, key points, documentation or analysis
essential to the needs of the information requested, for example: specific matter, or specific
discussions, etc.
Please advise by return email
by 9 July 2026 whether you wish to refine or clarify your request and, if
so, how you would like QLDC to proceed.
Decision to withhold information – Items 2, 5 and 7 (in part) QLDC has good reason under sections 6(c), 7(2)(a), 7(2)(f)(ii) and 7(2)(g) of the LGOIMA for
withholding part of the information requested in items 2, 5 and 7 of your request. QLDC considers it
is necessary to withhold the requested information on the basis of the following grounds:
• Section 6(c) – the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective
maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences,
and the right to a fair trial.
• Section 7(2)(a) – the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of
natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.
• Section 7(2)(f) – the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective
conduct of public affairs through—
(ii)
the protection of such members, officers, employees, and persons from improper
pressure or harassment.
• Section 7(2)(g) – the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional
privilege.
Section 6(c) of the LGOIMA allows information to be withheld if its release would likely prejudice law
enforcement or the right to a fair trial. This ensures that sensitive operational or investigative details
are protected to maintain effective enforcement and judicial integrity.
2. The defined criteria used to decide when chains are required. For example, whether the
decision is based on snow depth, ice, road surface temperature, weather conditions, vehicle
type, road gradient, crash risk, Police advice, contractor advice, ski field advice or any other
objective criteria.
5. Any training material, induction material, qualifications, standard operating procedures or
competency requirements for contractors, ski field staff or any other people who make
decisions about requiring motorists to fit chains.
7. Any risk assessments, health and safety assessments, legal advice, engineering advice or
operational reviews relating to the decision to require chains.
In this instance, the information requested is an operational documentation containing detailed
guidance used to train staff and ensure consistency in enforcement. Releasing it could enable
individuals to anticipate enforcement approaches or identify patterns in decision-making, potentially
compromising current and future operations. It could also reduce public confidence in enforcement
processes.
In this case, maintaining effective enforcement is a consideration that outweighs the public interest
in the information being made available. Therefore, withholding the requested information is not
outweighed by the public interest in favour of its release.
7. Any risk assessments, health and safety assessments, legal advice, engineering advice or
operational reviews relating to the decision to require chains.
Section 7(2)(a) of the LGOIMA is intended to protect the privacy of natural persons by allowing
information to be withheld where its release would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal
information or could cause harm or distress. This provision seeks to balance the public’s right to access
official information with the need to respect individual privacy and prevent the misuse of personal
information.
In this instance, while photo evidence relating to the decision to require chains was released in
response to item 7 of your request, number plates are being withheld as it relates to identifiable
natural persons. The
Privacy Act 2020 upholds individuals’ rights to be informed about the collection,
use, and disclosure of their personal information. Release of the requested information would be likely
to constitute an unreasonable intrusion into the personal affairs of those persons.
In this case, the need to protect the privacy of natural person outweighs any public interest in the
release of the information. Accordingly, the decision to withhold the information is justified and
consistent with the provisions of both LGOIMA and the Privacy Act.
Section 7(2)(f)(ii) of the LGOIMA protects individuals—such as members, officers, and employees—
from improper pressure or harassment, ensuring the effective conduct of public affairs. This provision
safeguards public officials from undue influence or intimidation, enabling them to perform their duties
impartially and effectively.
In this case, while the roles of individuals involved have been disclosed in the correspondence
provided in response to item 7 of your request, names and contact details have been withheld
to prevent the risk of harassment. This is particularly important given the nature of the subject matter,
which is of high public interest and sensitivity. The protection of these individuals from improper
pressure or harassment takes precedence over the public interest in disclosing specific information.
Releasing the names and contact emails could potentially lead to undue pressure or intimidation,
which could undermine the effective conduct of public affairs and harm the safety and well-being of
those involved.
Therefore, withholding this information is justified to preserve both individual rights and the integrity
of public offices.
Section 7(2)(g) of the LGOIMA permits the withholding of official information to maintain legal
professional privilege. This privilege safeguards the confidentiality of legal advice, ensuring that it can
be sought and provided freely without concern of disclosure, thereby supporting effective legal
counsel and preserving the integrity of legal processes.
In this instance, the legal review of the bylaw conducted in 2025 is subject to legal privilege. Section
7(2)(g) of the LGOIMA recognises the protection of legal professional privilege as a ground for
withholding information, reflecting the importance of maintaining confidentiality in legal
communications. This safeguard supports the provision of effective legal advice and the integrity of
legal processes.
After careful consideration, QLDC has determined that the need to maintain legal professional
privilege outweighs any public interest considerations that might otherwise support disclosure.
Accordingly, the information in this category is withheld under section 7(2)(g).
Public interest considerations In assessing whether to withhold information, QLDC carefully evaluates the public interest—
particularly whether disclosure would enhance transparency, accountability, or informed public
engagement. This assessment includes weighing those benefits against the potential harm that could
result from releasing the information.
QLDC acknowledges the public interest in transparency, accountability, and good governance in local
authority decision-making, and is committed to releasing information wherever possible. However, in
this instance, QLDC considers that the public interest in disclosure is outweighed by the need to
protect the privacy of natural persons; protect officers, employees, and individuals from improper
pressure or harassment; and maintain legal professional privilege. The release of this information
would be likely to unreasonably to compromise the privacy of natural persons; expose officers and
private individuals to improper pressure or harassment; and undermine the confidentiality of legal
communications.
Accordingly, QLDC has determined that sections 7(2)(a), 7(2)(f)(ii) and 7(2)(g) of the LGOIMA applies.
No overriding public interest has been identified that would justify release of the withheld
information.
QLDC trusts that the above information satisfactorily answers your request.
Right to review the above decision
You have the right to request an investigation and review of this decision by the Ombudsman under
section 27(3) of the LGOIMA. Further information is available
at www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or
by calling 0800 802 602.
If you wish to discuss this decision with QLDC, please con
tact [email address] (Director
Democracy Services).
Proactive release of LGOIMA responses
QLDC proactively publishes responses to requests made under the LGOIMA where the information is
considered to be of wider public interest. As such, please be aware that a response to your request
may be published on
QLDC’s website or otherwise made publicly available. Where this occurs, any
personal information will be redacted in accordance with the
Privacy Act 2020 and applicable
withholding grounds, to ensure individuals’ privacy is protected.
Kind regards,
Larissa
Democracy Services Team
Corporate Services | Queenstown Lakes District Council
P: +64 3 441 0499
E:
[email address]
