This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Official Information request 'Is Auckland Council Complying with the Public Records Act 2005 ?'.
1
From:
Patrick Power
To:
Penny Bright
Subject:
Investigating a complaint about Auckland Council recordkeeping
Date:
Friday, 11 March 2011 2:28:00 PM
Dear Penny,
I understand from our discussion on the phone that you requested access to information held by the
Auckland Council, under LGOIMA - specifically records about contractors. The council has replied to
you declining your request, stating that it would take too much time to research and collate the
information. You feel that this indicates the council is not keeping proper records about contractors,
and that this may be a breach of the Public Records Act, specifically section 17.
Archives New Zealand does take possible breaches of the Public Records Act seriously
In order for us to investigate your complaint we will need more information about what you requested
and what the council's response was. Can you supply a copy of your request and the reply?
We will also need to write to the Council about your request, in order to clarify their understanding of
the situation. Can you please confirm that you are happy for us to do this
Regards,
Patrick Power
Manager, Government Recordkeeping Programme
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6035
Mobile: +64 21 289 4869
www.dia.govt.nz
www.archives.govt.nz
Released under the Official Information Act 1982


2
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


3
Recordkeeping 
Advice Meeting 
Record
Date/Time 
23rd May 2011 
Advisors (Archives NZ) 
Rebecca Smart & Marion Sanson 
Note taker 
Rebecca Smart 
File reference 
A571609 
Client information 
Name(s) 
Penny Bright 
Complaint 
Formal Complaint under Section 61 of PRA against 
Email 
[email address] 
Phone 
Issues raised by Complaint 
On the morning of the 23rd May 2011, Penny Bright arrived at the Archives New 
Zealand, Mulgrave street office.  She requested to meet with someone in order to lay 
a complaint under section 61 of the Public Records Act. 
A meeting was held between Penny Bright, Marion Sanson and myself in the Rehutai 
Meeting room, at 9.45am til appox 10.30am . 
Penny Bright started the meeting by stating “she would like to lay a formal complaint 
about an alleged breach of S.61 (c) of the Public Records Act 2005”.  At this point 
she also stated that her belief was that Auckland Council had failure to comply with 
S.17 (1) of the Act.  To prove this claims she provided a copy of the Local 
Government Official Information Meetings Act letter that was sent to the Auckland 
Council CEO (attachment 1) on the 10th March 2011.  In this letter she requested 
information in regards to a central Register of Contracts. 
The next letter presented to us was in response to her request and was dated 26th 
April 2011 from Bruce Thomas Public Information Manager.  She also gave us 6 
letters relating to her LGOIMA request, which was a transfer of the request to other 
Council organisations.  She also presented a response letter from Regional facilities 
Auckland in relation to this letter.  A letter of notification has also been sent to 
Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hide and is included in her attachments. 
After reading through the attachments, Marion asked Penny if she had contacted the 
Ombudsman and/or the Office of the Auditor-General in which is replied no and she 
would not be doing so. 
When requested for the complaint in writing by Marion she was not able to provide 
it  so at this point she wrote a handwritten letter, which I organised a received stamp 
to be placed on and signed to say that we have received a copy of the complaint and 
the provided evidence. 
The meeting was then closed with a comment that we would be in touch once we 
had investigated her claim.  Meeting ended. 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982


4
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

5
From:
Cathy Holmes
To:
Patrick Power; Simon Caseley
Cc:
John Roberts; Rebecca Smart; Marion Sanson
Subject:
RE: File Note - Complaint from Penny Bright against Auckland Council - Breach of PRA (A571609)
Date:
Monday, 30 May 2011 9:51:14 AM
Hi Patrick
Can you please let me see the formal letter before it is sent out.
thanks
Cathy
Cathy Holmes
Communications Adviser
Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6084
www.dia.govt.nz
From: Patrick Power 
Sent: Friday, 27 May 2011 1:53 p.m.
To: Simon Caseley
Cc: John Roberts; Rebecca Smart; Marion Sanson; Cathy Holmes
Subject: RE: File Note - Complaint from Penny Bright against Auckland Council - Breach of PRA
(A571609)
I've asked Simon to take the lead on the investigation of this complaint, following the process I've
outlined below.
Marion, can you please liaise with him re the formal letter back to Penny Bright.
Patrick Power
Manager, Government Recordkeeping Programme
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6035
Mobile: +64 21 289 4869
www.dia.govt.nz
www.archives.govt.nz
From: Marion Sanson 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2011 11:17 a.m.
To: Patrick Power
Cc: John Roberts; Rebecca Smart
Subject: RE: F le Note - Complaint from Penny Bright against Auckland Council - Breach of PRA
(A571609)
Hello Paddy,
Your suggested approach appears good to me. You may find the attached draft Investigations Policy
useful   It includes a table that indicates a way of working through a complaint.  It may be helpful to
outline to Bright early on how ArNZ intends to investigate and what the expected timeframe for a final
reply is.
My initial comments are:
The issue for ArNZ is what does s 17(1) of the Public Records Act require around local authority
contract management? 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Penny Bright has asked about "Registers of Contracts"; first of all whether such registers were kept

by the 8 pre-reorganisation Auckland councils, the CCOs of the pre-organisation councils, the
Auckland Transition Agency, and the current Auckland Council, and the Auckland Council's CCOs. 
Auckland Council (AC) responded, correctly, that there is no requirement to keep a central register of
contracts.  AC recognises, however, that a register is a good idea and is developing one. AC is also
correct in noting that council controlled organisations (CCOs) are separate "local authorities" under
the Public Records Act.  In terms of the Public Records Act CCOs have an obligation to keep full and
accurate records of their contracts.
I agree with Penny, that to comply with s 17(1) LAs and CCOs need to have a full and accurate
records of their contracts, but that would not necessarily mean a register.
The Chief Archivist can, under s 29, inspect LA systems for maintaining records, which could be
useful, but cannot direct the AC and its CCOs to report on the practices around the management of
their contracts records.  A first step may be for ArNZ to ask the AC and the CCOs to confirm that they
have full & accurate records about their contracts. 
Whether or not contract information is released is a separate question from the question whether the
AC and the CCOs have such records. The proper place for Bright to complain about a refusal to
release information requested under LGOIMA is the Office of the Ombudsmen   
I'm happy to assist further with this investigation,
Regards
Marion Sanson
Legal and Policy Analyst
Archives Policy
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
x9346
From: Patrick Power 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2011 9:08 a.m
To: Rebecca Smart; Marion Sanson
Cc: John Roberts
Subject: RE: File Note - Complaint from Penny Bright against Auckland Council - Breach of PRA
(A571609)
Thanks for stepping in to handle this Bex. It was much appreciated.
I'm thinking that it might be best if someone else deals with Penny and the formal correspondence,
seeing as you are the account manager for the Auckland Council. It seems like there is a potential for
a conflict of interest  What do you think?
Based on my experience with other complaints, and my recent discussions with State Records NSW,
I think the next steps are:
1. Review of the material provided and initial analysis - is what is described actually a breach of the
Act?
2. Formal letter responding to the compliant, making clear what we think the issues are and setting
some limits around what we can investigate.
3 Formal contact with Auckland Council around the complaint, if necessary, seeking information.
4 Develop an preliminary view on the issues, and discuss this with the council.
5. Finalise the preliminary view, and write to Penny Bright about this. She may wish to comment or
provide further information at this stage.
6. If we are considering upholding the complaint, I think we need to give the council a chance to
comment and/or provide further information as well.
7. Form a final view and write to Penny Bright and the Council about it.
8. Follow up on any issues if necessary.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

9. Close complaint.
Patrick Power
Manager, Government Recordkeeping Programme
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6035
Mobile: +64 21 289 4869
www.dia.govt.nz
www.archives.govt.nz
From: Rebecca Smart 
Sent: Monday, 23 May 2011 4:49 p.m.
To: Marion Sanson
Cc: John Roberts; Patrick Power
Subject: File Note - Complaint from Penny Bright against Auckland Council - Breach of PRA
(A571609)
Hi Marion,
Attached is a file note of our meeting this morning, can you plea e have a look and make sure I got
everything.  Not sure what we need to do next but I thought a meeting maybe to discuss a way
forward.
Cheers
Bex
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

6
National Office, PO Box 12 050, Wellington 6144, New Zealand 
T 04 499 5595 
04 495 6210  [email address] 
www.archives.govt.nz 
Xx May 2011 
Penny Bright 
Media Spokesperson      
[email address] 
Dear Penny Bright  
Complaint about Recordkeeping by Auckland Council 
1. Acknowledge receipt of complaint – what is the c
plaint about?
Thank you for your formal complaint about the reply  ou received  om Auckland Council, 
which appears to indicate that Auckland Council’s rec dkeep g does not meet the 
requirements of section 17(1) of the Public Records Act 

2. Clarify complaint
I note that Auckland Council has transferre  part of 
  nquiry to the CCOs, so it is 
possible you will receive more information.    note t
t Regi
al Facilities Auckland has 
indicated it does hold a registe   f contracts. 
As AC said, there is no r quiremen   o hold a c
tral register of contracts.  I note that AC 
recognises that havin  such a regis er is a good  ea and is in the process of creating one.   
The requirement to cr
te and m
 
  nd accurate records of AC’s affairs and of every 
matter contracted out do
 no   equire a register, but I would expect that, if the need arose, 
AC could generate a list of 
ntracts.   
I sugges   our compla
 is that 
ortant information about Auckland Council’s 
prede
ssor’s and its ow  contracts, is not available without substantial collation and 
resear
  Do you agree t
 this is the real issue for me to explore in terms of 
recordkee ng?  DRAFT
3. What is ou
de th  scope of the Chief Archivist’s functions
Had AC said that it holds the information you requested but will withhold the information for 
good reasons in term of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 
(LGOIMA) the complaint would clearly be outside my functions, and would be a matter for the 
Office of the Ombudsmen.  As it is, I have no power to require the release of information.   
4. What is within the scope of the Chief Archivist’s functions
In relation to local authority records, the Chief Archivist has declared certain local authority 
records to be protected records.  The management of protected records are subject to higher 
levels of scrutiny.  Some contracts will be protected records, e.g. contracts for public utilities.  
Other contracts must be kept for 7 years as financial records.    
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

Both AC and its CCOs are subject to the Public Records Act.  In relation to section 17(1), the 
Chief archivist and Archives New Zealand are not solely responsible for prosecuting 
complaints, although Archives New Zealandwould be a lead agency. 
My favoured approach in cases such as this is to investigate by asking questions of the AC 
and the CCOs to ascertain their standard of recordkeeping.  I agree, contracts are important 
records of both AC and the CCOs and AC ought to have been able to confirm information 
received from predecessors (Q 1), advise how many CCOs operated under the predecessor 
bodies (Q 2), whether or not ach predecessor had created and maintained a central register 
of contracts (Q 3). 
The ATA was not a local authority, but it was a public office subject to th  Public Records 
Act, and its records were transferred to the AC, I would expect that A A would have held 
information about contracts it became a party to, and that this info
at
 would now be held 
by AC (Q 4). 
5. Proposed action 
Chief Archivist can investigate the recordkeeping syst m of AC and CCOs.  Some of your 
questions are historic. 
I propose to investigate whether AC and the CCOs have 
sfactory systems in place for 
their records of their contracts.  
Inference that inability to provide – indicat s poor 
rdkeeping 
Approach is to point out the value of a regis r, and  f having good, readily available 
information about its contract   
 
 
6. Timeframe 
 
 
DRAFT
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
 



Recordkeeping 
7
Advice Meeting 
Record
Date/Time 
7/6/2011 
Advisors (Archives NZ) 
Patrick Power 
Note taker 
Patrick Power 
File reference 
2011/1514 
Client information 
Name(s) 
Penny Bright 
Complaint 
Formal Complaint under Section 61 of PRA 
Email 
[email address] 
Phone 
Penny rang me on my mobile on 7/6. I was at home on sick leave. 
She wanted to find out about progress with her complaint. I said we were drafting a 
letter which would say what we understood the complaint to be and what we could 
investigate and steps from here. I noted that some aspects were probably in the 
Ombudsmen’s jurisdiction. Also noted that CCOs not in scope. She said she had rung 
because she is in Wel ington tomorrow. 
I said we would probably be posting the letter this week. 
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

8
From:
Patrick Power
To:
Penny Bright
Subject:
Letter acknowledging complaint
Date:
Friday, 10 June 2011 4:01:00 PM
Dear Penny,
I said on the phone the other day that we would send a formal reply to you this week. 
The letter has been prepared for the Chief Archivist's signature. Unfortunately he is in Auckland
today, so the letter will not be sent until next week. I anticipate that we will also be writing to the
Auckland Council.
I do apologise for the delay in preparing a formal response.
Regards,
Patrick Power
Manager, Government Recordkeeping Programme
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6035
Mobile: +64 21 289 4869
www.dia.govt.nz
www.archives.govt.nz
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

9
National Office, PO Box 12 050, Wellington 6144, New Zealand 
04 499 5595    04 495 6210     E  [email address] 
www.archives.govt.nz 
28 June 2011 
Ms P Bright 
Media Spokesperson 
Water Pressure Group 
Via email:  [email address] 
Dear Ms Bright 
Complaint under the Public Records Act 2005 
Thank you for visiting Archives New Zealand’s Wellington office on 23 May 2011 and your 
interest in the recordkeeping obligations of local government under the Public Records Act 
2005. 
In your meeting with Archives New Zealand staff, you registered a complaint about the 
recordkeeping of the Auckland Council and Council Controlled Organisations.   
Your written complaint alleges that those agencies have breached s17(1) of the Public 
Records Act 2005. Specifically, you allege that those agencies have failed to create and 
maintain registers of contracts and it is reasonable to expect that they should create and 
maintain such records.   
The obligations to create and maintain adequate records are set out in more detail in the 
Create and Maintain Recordkeeping Standard. This Standard is mandatory for all local 
authorities.       
The Auckland Council and the Council Controlled Organisations must all comply with the 
Public Records Act 2005. However, they are separately accountable for their own 
recordkeeping. This means that the Auckland Council is not responsible for the 
recordkeeping of the Council Controlled Organisations and the Council Controlled 
Organisations are responsible for creating and maintaining their own records of contracts. 
I must advise you that I have no jurisdiction over requests for information made under the 
Local Government and Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. Therefore, I cannot 
investigate decisions by the Auckland Council or the Council Controlled Organisations not to 
release information to you.  
I note that the Auckland Council has transferred some of your requests for information to the 
Council Controlled Organisations because that information is held by them.  It would be 
helpful to me if you would inform me of the outcome of this request. 
I would like to assure you that I take all suggestions of non-compliance with the Public 
Records Act very seriously. I will be seeking further information from the Auckland Council 
regarding the matters you raise and will determine, what, if any, action I consider 
appropriate. I will keep you fully informed as I deal with the issues.   
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

In closing, please accept my apologies for the delay in formally acknowledging your 
complaint.  
Yours sincerely 
Greg Goulding 
Chief Archivist and General Manager 
Archives New Zealand 
Department of Internal Affairs 
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982
Obj Ref:  A576349 


10
From:
Raewyn Vogel
To:
Penny Bright
Subject:
Complaint under the Public Records Act 2005
Date:
Tuesday, 28 June 2011 9:38:47 AM
Attachments:
img-628091029.pdf
Dear Ms Bright
Please find attached a reply from the Chief Archivist of Archives New Zealand to your complaint made under
the Public Records Act 2005.
Kind regards
Raewyn Vogel
Personal Assistant to Greg Goulding, Chief Archivist & General Manager
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
The Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua
10 Mulgrave St
PO Box 12 050
Wellington 6144 New Zealand
Direct Dial:  +64 4 496 1381 Extn:  9381
F + 64 4 495 6210
www.dia.govt.nz
www.archives.govt nz
Released under the Official Information Act 1982


10
attachment
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

11
The Chief Executive 
Auckland Council  
Private Bag 92300 
Auckland 1142 
Act 1982
Dear [Doug Mackay] 
Re: Alleged breach of the Public Records Act 2005 
I am notifying you that a complaint has been received about the recordkeep
 of the 
Auckland Council.   
Section 17(1) of the Public Records Act 2005 require   hat agenci s covered by the Act, 
including the Auckland Council, create and maintain  ll and ac
ate records, in accordance 
with normal, prudent business practice.  
The complaint instances that the Council  hould create and  aintain registers of contracts, in 
accordance with s17(1), but has failed to  o s   
The same complaint is also made against s veral C
n
 
ntrolled Organisations. Those 
organisations are separately accountable fo   hei   wn recordkeeping under the Act. 
Therefore, I am dealing with 
  omplaints 
 this time, I do not intend notifying them 
about the same matter be ause the  is  At thi   tage, I am I may be approaching them, 
pending the outcome   the compla ants reque  for information under the  
The complaint arose fro  an of
ial inform
n request under LGOIMA for registers of 
contracts. 
Can 
u please advise m  of a responsible officer within the Council, who will manage the 
investig
on of this matte   n behalf of the Council.  
DRAFT
They advise that you only need one certificate of compliance, because the main check is on the 
procedure you followed when digitising, not the business process itself. What you can do is send a 
copy of the checklist of mandatory requirements to the departments who are undertaking scanning, 
ask that they work through them and tick them off. You can then bundle the completed 
checklists together and send them to the CE with the certificate of compliance for signoff, so they can 
see that the requirements have been met. 
it seems appropriate for the CE signoff to be at a programme level rather than a solution level. So 
only one certificate of compliance would be required. overarching Certificate of Compliance that 
covers all instances of digitisation solutions 
Released under the Official Information

if you wanted to do this for another business procedure, the certification would have to be completed 
again 
1982
From our perspective, the key thing is that the Chief Executive is able to have an appropriate level of 
assurance that the requirements in the General Disposal Authority and Digitisation Standard wil  be 
met. 
Act
From our discussions, I understand that there is in effect a programme of digitisation at MSD. That is, 
there is a standard approach to designing, approving, and monitoring digitisatio   olutions, and clear 
internal governance for this work. 
In this situation, it seems appropriate for the CE signoff to be at a pro
mme 
l rather than a 
solution level. So only one certificate of compliance would be required. 
Official Information
DRAFT
under the
Released


12
From:
Jacqueline Davidson
To:
Shanann Carr
Subject:
RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Date:
Monday, 14 July 2014 11:55:39 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
Hi Shanann,
Yes, I can confirm that I received the mail. A bit swamped at the moment, but should, hopefully, have
something to you by the end of the week.
Rgds
Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
From: Shanann Carr [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Monday, 14 July 2014 11:52 a.m.
To: Jacqueline Davidson
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi there Jacqui,
I'm just seeking confirmation that you received the below, and an indication of when I
may get a response from you?
Kind regards,
Shanann Carr
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
10 Mulgrave Street | PO Box 12-050, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
www.archives.govt nz | www.thecommunityarchive.org.nz
From: Shanann Carr 
Sent: Friday, 27 June 2014 3:35 p.m.
To: 'Jacqueline Davidson'
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Jacqui,
As discussed in our recent telephone conversation I have attached the original correspondence
between Penny Bright and Auckland Council for your information.
The complaint we received in May 2011 suggested that Auckland Council was not complying
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

with section 17 of the Public Records Act:
17 Requirement to create and maintain records
(1) Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate
records of its affairs, in accordance with normal, prudent business practice, including the
records of any matter that is contracted out to an independent contractor.
(2) Every public office must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used for
subsequent reference, all public records that are in its control, until their disposal is
authorised by or under this Act or required by or under another Act.
(3) Every local authority must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used
for subsequent reference, all protected records that are in its control, until their disposal
is authorised by or under this Act.

Ms Bright believed that Auckland Council, including its predecessors, were not keeping
appropriate records regarding the management of its contractors, in this case registers, and was
therefore failing to comply with the Act.
We did begin an investigation of the complaint, but it appears this investigation was not
completed or documented. At this stage I am hoping you can recall the complaint made by Ms
Bright, and if so could you please clarify your understanding of the situation in writing. Could you
also please provide a summary of actions regarding Auckland Councils management of contactor
records since the incident in question, i.e. what improvements have been made to the system
for keeping such records between then and now.
I am looking to gain further context so I can determine whether Archives New Zealand will need
to investigate.
If you need anything clarified further please let me know.
Kind regards,
Shanann Carr
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
10 Mulgrave Street | PO Box 12-050, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
www.archives.govt nz | www.thecommunityarchive.org.nz
From: Jacqueline Davidson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Tuesday, 10 June 2014 1:19 p.m.
To: Shanann Carr
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Shannan,
If you want to give me a call to discuss this, I’m available between 4-4.30 this afternoon or any time
after 12 tomorrow.
Regards
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
From: Shanann Carr [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Monday, 9 June 2014 9:49 a.m.
To: Jacqueline Davidson
Subject: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Dear Jacqui,
I am Shanann Carr, a Senior Advisor in the Recordkeeping Capability team at Archives
New Zealand.
I have been asked to follow up a query from a member of the public, about
recordkeeping practices at Auckland Council. The query is regarding a potential breach
of sections 17(1) and 61(c)of the Public Records Act 2005, the complainant was not
provided access to the records she requested and it was suggested that this was a
breech of the act.
This complaint was made to Archives New Zealand in approximately May 2011;
however we have been asked to re-activate the investigation as it is not obvious to us
that the Archives New Zealand staff member working on the complaint at the time
completed the investigation. The staff member is no longer with Archives New Zealand
and we are unable to follow up w th them about this. For the purposes of ensuring an
investigation was commenced, or completed, I am wondering if Auckland Council may
have record of the investigation taking place in approximately March-May 2011 with
details of an outcome. If not, I am wondering if we can have a chat about the case so
we can finally have resolution?
Details of the investigation are as follows:
Date Archives New Zealand Received complaint: 23 May 2011
Complainant: Penny Bright
Complaint: Ms Bright requested information from Auckland Council, specifically
evidence that  prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council each of the following
councils [listed in original letter] had created and maintained a 'central register of
contracts' for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor", she
asked to see proof of this, among other things, including information regarding CCOs.
Date information was requested from Auckland Council: 10 March 2011.
Date Ms Bright was responded to by Auckland Council: 26 April 2011.
Responded to by: Bruce Thomas, Public Information Manager, Democracy Services
At this stage I am wondering if you may recall or have record of this complaint and/or
any investigation of the matter by Archives New Zealand.
I am happy to discuss this over the phone if that is easiest. When would be a good time
Released under the Official Information Act 1982



to give you a call?
Many thanks,
Shanann Carr
Shanann Carr | Senior Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
10 Mulgrave Street | PO Box 12-050, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
www.archives.govt nz | www.thecommunityarchive.org.nz
Archives New Zealand is part of the Department of Internal Affairs
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recip ent, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or
attachments is strictly proh bited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and
erase all copies of the message and attachments  W  do not accept responsibility for any viruses or similar carried with
our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this
email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

13
From:
Jacqueline Davidson
To:
Shanann Carr
Subject:
Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Date:
Friday, 18 July 2014 2:22:30 PM
Attachments:
RM Contractor Recordkeeping Guidelines.doc
Hi Shanann,
With reference to your investigation into Archives New Zealand response to the complaint laid by
Penny Bright where she believed that the Auckland Council, including its predecessors, were not
keeping appropriate records regarding the management of its contractor registers, I would make the
following comments:
·
I was not involved in the response to the initial complaint, but have reviewed the material you
have provided, and concur with the response of our letter dated 26 April 2011 the main points
being:
o Auckland Council is under no obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts
(as distinct from our obligation to create and maintain our records s17 PRA –
inferred)
o The Council is currently in the process of developing such a register
o Once established, the information contained in the register would be withheld for
commercial reasons as detailed in section 7(2)(h) of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act
·
At the time of the original request from Ms Bright, 10 March 2011, the Auckland Council had
been in existence as an amalgamated entity for a little over 4 months. During the
amalgamation process, under the auspices of the ATA, considerable effort was expended to
discover and manage information relating to contractors from all the legacy councils. The
nature of contracts (length of term) means that this can be quite fluid, hence the time taken to
establish a definitive register during this settling i  period.
·
Since this time, Council has established new procurement processes which manage our
contracts through a business system (SAP) integrated with the respective contract
document(s) stored in our corporate records repository, TRIM. The records in TRIM are
managed by my team, and have appropriate security and rights assigned to them, as well as
retention and disposition actions taken from our approved retention schedule.
·
The Records and Archives team made extensive submissions on the new procurement
process and have been involved in the roll-out and training to the organisation.
·
In terms of managing the records created by contractors, we have developed the attached
guidelines for contractor records (heavily based on the guidance of Archives NZ).
·
Should this request be made again, I would recommend that any contractor information be
withheld on the grounds that to release it would unreasonably prejudice the commercial
position of the person who supplied or is subject to the contract information. Naturally this
would be on a case-by-case basis.
I hope that this provides you with enough information, if not, or you would like further clarification,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
These comments are my opinion and not necessarily the view of the Auckland Council.
Rgds
Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142


Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or
attachments is strictly proh bited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and
erase all copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for any viruses or similar carried w th
our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this
email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982


13
Attachment 
RECORDS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE: RECORDKEEPING FOR 
BUSINESS ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY CONTRACTORS 
Date of Effect: 7 November 2012 
Date of Last Revision: 
N/A 
Contact: 
Team Leader Records Management 
PURPOSE 
The purpose of this document is to provide a guideline for creating and maintaining the records of Auckland 
Council (the council) business activities carried out by contractors.  
The benefits of formalising recordkeeping requirements of contractors include: 

retention of corporate knowledge

protection of the organisation’s assets

legal obligations can be met

mitigation of service delivery disputes

intellectual property protection.
GLOSSARY 
Contractor
: a person, corporation or service provider who is contracted by the local authority to supply or 
arrange the supply of goods or the performance of services to the local authority. 
Contractors can be engaged to perform business activities on the local authority’s behalf; either in their 
entirety, or with input from the local authority. 
Work being undertaken for the local authority by contactors can be short-term or on-going, and may be 
conducted within the organisation or externally. For example: 

Small-scale business activities, e.g. fixed-term project manager to run an internal project, or
engaging consultant to develop a policy paper

Medium to large scale business activities, e.g. engaging a contract manager to run a major utilities
project

Temporary internal role

Outsourcing an entire business function, e.g. contracting out the provision of a service to customers.
Disposal: the transfer of control of a record; or the sale, alteration, destruction, or discharge of a record 
(PRA, s4) 
Local Authority: a regional council or territorial authority. This includes: 

A council-controlled organisation

A council-controlled trading organisation and

A local government organisation (PRA, s4)
Local Authority Record: A record or class of records in any form, in whole or in part, created or 
received…by a local authority in the conduct of its affairs. (PRA, s4) 
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982

Protected Record: A local authority record declared by the Chief Archivist to be a protected record by notice 
in the Gazette. A local authority must provide for the adequate protection and preservation of its protected 
records. Protected records must not be disposed of without the authorisation of the Chief Archivist. A list of 
local authority protected records is known as the “Local Government Schedule”. (PRA, s40) 
Record: Information, whether in its original form or otherwise, including (without limitation) a document, a 
signature, a seal, text, images, sound, speech, or data compiled, recorded, or stored, as the case may be,— 

in written form on any material; or

on film, negative, tape, or other medium so as to be capable of being reproduced; or

by means of any recording device or process, computer, or other electronic device or process
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND OBLIGATIONS 
Public Records Act 2005 

Section 17: Requirement to create and maintain records 
(1) Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its affairs, in 
accordance with normal, prudent business practice, including the records of any matter that is contracted out 
to an independent contractor. 
(2) Every public office must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used for subsequent 
reference, all public records that are in its control, until their disposal is authorised by or under this Act or 
required by or under another Act. 
(3) Every local authority must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used for subsequent 
reference, all protected records that are in its control, until their d sposal is authorised by or under this Act. 
Protected records, Section 17(3), are described in the Local Government Schedule. 
Create and Maintain Recordkeeping Standard 
2.2.2 Responsibilities for Records of Functions Carried out under Contract 
The Public Records Act 2005 requires local authorities to create and maintain full and accurate records of 
their affairs, including records of matters contrac ed out to independent contractors. The legal obligation to 
ensure that records of local government functions are created and maintained therefore rests always 
with the local government entity, not the independent contractor
. Depending on the nature of the work 
being contracted out, this will require either: 

the contractor creating and temporarily maintaining the records regarding the function on behalf of
the local authority, or

the contractor regularly providing the local authority with sufficient information about the function to
enable the creation and maintenance of full and accurate records, or

a combination of the two.
Contracts or agreements with contractors should contain provisions to ensure that such records are created 
and maintained according to the requirements of the standard. 
Additional legislation 
Other acts support the need for a good standard of recordkeeping by local authorities, including: 

Official Information Act 1982

Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

Public Finance Act 1989

Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992

Financial Reporting Act 1993

Privacy Act 1993

Copyright Act 1994

Tax Administration Act 1994
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Page 2 


Electronic Transactions Act 2002

Evidence Act 2006

Limitations Act 2010.
There may also be recordkeeping requirements in sector-specific legislation and industry standards. 
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 
The Public Records Act 2005 requires that the council must maintain records of its relationships with 
contractors, and the activities the contractors undertake on council’s behalf. 
Recordkeeping activity should be informed by the level of risk associated with the business activity. Where 
the accountability level is high, the council requires contractors to create records which will provide it with 
detailed evidence of the work undertaken. 
It is the responsibility of the council to work with contractors to agree and clearly define expectations for 
those records the contractors create or receive during the term of their engagement. 
The level of recordkeeping support contractors might need depends on factors such as whether they are 
working internally or externally. For example, external contractors may not require training on the 
organisation’s corporate recordkeeping systems. 
RECORDKEEPING CONSIDERATIONS FOR INCORPORATION INTO 
CONTRACTS WITH CONTRACTORS 
1.
Make sure recordkeeping requirements and respons bilities are clearly understood by all
parties 

Recordkeeping responsibilities should be communicated to contractors, whether they are working 
internally or externally. 

agree with the contractor the records expected to be created, captured and temporarily
maintained during the performance of the activity

if a contractor is given custody of, or access to council’s records to assist them in their work,
including copies, set clear guidelines on how long they can keep them, and who they can share
them with. Check that all reco ds are returned by the agreed time.

specify the relevant policies and guidance material that are to be used by the contractor when
undertaking a business activ ty on council’s behalf, e.g. internal recordkeeping policies and other
applicable guidelines

agree on a process to share and hand over electronic and physical records throughout the
contractor’s engagement with the council, or at the conclusion of the contract.
2.
Prevent unauthorised disposal of records
Disposal and control of local authority protected records rest with the council, specifically the
Records and A chives team, unless otherwise agreed
3.
Maintain oversight and control of records

Check the contractor is meeting the council’s recordkeeping and accountability requirements
through a monitoring process, e.g. reporting, audit or inspection.

Define and document the ownership of records and the information they contain; this includes
records created by the contractor while they are working with the council, and records
transferred by council to the contractor.
4.
Records created by, or provided to contractors must remain accessible
Under section 17(2) and 17(3) of the Public Records Act 2005, local authority protected records must
remain accessible to the council and the public for reference, e.g. through a Local Government
Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) request.

ensure records are routinely captured into council’s recordkeeping framework

recordkeeping metadata for records must be created and managed
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Page 3 


come to an early agreement with the contractor over the format of physical and electronic
records to ensure they are accessible during the term of engagement and after transfer from the
contractor to the council

consider getting contractors a login to council’s systems to ease the administrative burden, or
set clear rules and expectations on what, when and how records are made available for transfer
or migration to the council’s system(s)

classify and manage physical records in line with council’s classification scheme

enforce council’s policies on the accessibility of sensitive information.
5.
Ensure records are appropriately stored

Arrange appropriate storage of all records involved in the contracted-out activity in line with
council’s storage guidelines and make sure the contractor is aware of these requirements.

Come to an agreement over the storage of electronic records, as they are vulnerable to
accidental disposal and damage.
WHAT RECORDS SHOULD BE CREATED AND KEPT? 
Contractors perform business activities on behalf of the council either in their entirety, or with input from the 
council. The following records should be created: 

The contracting relationship
The council is responsible for creating and maintaining records of relationships with contractors. This
may include:

the tender specifications produced, and records of their distribution to potential bidders

the tender and evaluation process, including reasons for the selection of the successful
bidder

contracts, including any variations on cont acts

invoices

correspondence with the contractor and

the results of any monitoring or evaluation of the contractors’ work.

The business activity
The council may require contractors to create and provide the records of contracted out business
activities. The council does not have to do this itself.
Creating the record could take the form of:
• regular status reports from the contractor on the activity, or
• the contractor providing the records they have created during the term of their engagement
at the end of the contract, or when requested by council
• or both
Full and accurate records must be made of council’s affairs that have been contracted out, in keeping with 
normal, prudent business practice. This involves creating records which: 

document the carrying out of council’s business objectives, core business functions, services and
deliverables

provide evidence of compliance with current regulatory and legislative standards and/or
requirements

document the value of the resources of the council and how risks to the business are managed

support the long-term viability of the council.
REFERENCES 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Page 4 

Archives New Zealand. (2009). G17: Recordkeeping for Business Activities Carried out by Contractors 
http://archives.govt.nz/advice/continuum-resource-kit/continuum-publications-html/g17-recordkeeping-
business-activities-carr 
State Records of New South Wales. Guideline 16 Accountable outsourcing -Recordkeeping considerations 
of outsourcing NSW Government business.
http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/recordkeeping/government-
recordkeeping-manual/guidance/guidelines/guideline-16
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982
Page 5 

APPENDIX A: CONTRACT INCLUSIONS CHECKLIST 
Does the outsourcing contract include: 
1.  A listing of the recordkeeping requirements for the business being contracted out? 
Yes/No 
2.  A listing of the records that are to be returned to the council at the completion of the contract? 
Yes/No 
3.  A specification of the format/s that the records are to be returned to the council in at the 
Yes/No 
completion of the contract? 
4.  A statement regarding the council’s rights of access to the records of the outsourced business 
Yes/No 
access for the duration of the contract? 
5.  A requirement that basic control information is kept about the records of the outsourced 
Yes/No 
business to facilitate access and retrieval? 
6.  A requirement for the contractor to abide by the council’s privacy management plan or 
Yes/No 
equivalent in respect of the information it keeps for the purpose of the contract? 
7.  A requirement for the contractor to cooperate fully with the council in the event of an 
Yes/No 
application under a LGOIMA request relating to records of the outsourced business? 
8.  Authorisation by the council for the contractor to carry out specified disposal processes for 
Yes/No 
specified records? 
9.  An undertaking that specified records and the control information required to access them will 
Yes/No 
be returned to the council at the completion of the contract? 
10.  Dispute resolution procedures, and penaltie  where appropriate, for breach of the contract, 
Yes/No 
such as a failure to return records to the council at the completion of the contract? 
11.  Requirements for the contractor to store and handle records of the outsourced business in 
Yes/No 
accordance with council’s requirements? 
12.  Details of a mechanism by which the council can measure the contractor's compliance with the  Yes/No 
records requirements of the contract? 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Page 6 

APPENDIX B: EXAMPLES OF RECORDS CLAUSES FOR CONTRACTS 
Records of (the outsourced business) 

(Service provider) must create and keep records that fully document the operation and delivery of the 
service, including but not limited to: 

(specific recordkeeping requirements listed here).
This includes records generated and kept using electronic technologies, such as e-mail. 
Records format 
(Service provider) must ensure that records of (the outsourced business), if created and maintained in 
electronic format, are kept in a standard format that will be easily migratable to the Auckland Council's 
systems. In this case, the acceptable formats are: 

(specific electronic / other formats listed here)
Access to records 
The Auckland Council retains the right to access any records of (service provider) relevant to the delivery of 
(the outsourced business), for the purposes of monitoring compliance with this contract. 
(Service provider) must ensure that: 

data cannot be used for applications not specified in the contract (for example, to data match with
databases owned by other clients of the contractor).

personal information is to only be used for the purpose for which it was gathered, in accordance with
the Privacy Act 1993, and

files and other council records are not to be shown to a third party without the written agreement of
(the responsible council role).
(Service provider) must ensure that records are documented in manual or electronic control systems with 
basic identifying information, including (but not limited to) a unique identifier and location details. 
Records storage and handling 
Hard-copy records leant to and created by (service provider) must be stored in a secure environment so as 
to protect and ensure the physical and intellectual integrity of the records 
Storage areas for magnetic media are pro ected from magnetic fields. 
Records of (the outsourced business) that are in electronic format are backed up regularly, and copies are 
kept off-site. 
Reporting 
A report containing copies of records of the (outsourced business activity) is to be forwarded to (council's 
contact person) every (number) months, starting (number) months after the commencement of the contract 
Authorised disposal of records 
(Service provider) is required to retain records of (outsourced business activity) in its office for (number) 
years, and then destroy the records in a secure manner. 
(Service provider) is not permitted to destroy any records of (the outsourced business) corruptly or 
fraudulently, for the purpose of concealing evidence of wrongdoing, or for any other improper purpose. 
(Service provider) is not permitted to transfer records of (the outsourced business) to a third party for any 
purpose un ess authorised to do so by the Auckland Council. 
Return of records on completion of contract 
The following records of (the outsourced business) are to be returned to (the Auckland Council at the 
completion of the contract: 

records of (…) activity

records of (…) activity, and

any control records used to manage the above.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Page 7 

All records (of the outsourced business) created in the performance of this contract to be returned to 
(council’s contact person) in (an accessible) format. Nominated formats for electronic records are to be: 

(format / application X), or

(format / application Y).
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982
Page 8 

14
From:
Raewyn Vogel
To:
Patrick Power
Subject:
Phone Call/complaint - Penny Bright
Date:
Thursday, 21 August 2014 3:22:07 PM
Importance:
High
Hi Paddy
Just following up on our conversation earlier.
Please ring Penny Bright on 09 846 9825, or Mobile:   021 211 4127 urgently regarding her
complaint about the Auckland City Council.  She wants to know what we are doing regarding the
investigation to hold the Auckland Council accountable under the Public Records Act.
Her email address is:   [email address]
(She indicated that she was currently having problems with her computer so please ring her).
Penny rang at 14:54 today (21 August)
Thanks
Raewyn
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


15
From:
Patrick Power
To:
Penny Bright
Subject:
Progress on your complaint
Date:
Thursday, 21 August 2014 5:45:00 PM
Attachments:
image002.png
Dear Penny,
As discussed on the phone, a Senior Advisor in my team is progressing the investigation of your
complaint. We have received information from Auckland Council about the matter and are
considering that information to determine whether we believe there was a breach of the Public
Records Act 2005. We will write to you soon.
Regards,
Patrick Power | Manager Recordkeeping Capability | Public Sector Digital Continuity Manager
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6035 | Extn: 9335 | Fax: +64 4 495 6210 | Mobile: +64 21 685210
10 Mulgrave Street | PO Box 12-050, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
www.archives.govt nz | thecommunityarchive.org.nz
Archives New Zealand is part of the Department of Internal Affairs
Did you know that Archives New Zealand provide regular training courses?  For more information on courses
in your area click here

Released under the Official Information Act 1982

16
From:
Shanann Carr
To:
"Bruce Thomas"
Cc:
"Jacqueline Davidson"
Subject:
RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Date:
Thursday, 18 September 2014 3:27:00 PM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
Hi Bruce,
Since I haven’t heard from you, perhaps it is best that I give you a call.
What is your number? I could give you a call tomorrow?
Regards,
Shanann Carr
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
From: Jacqueline Davidson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Tuesday, 9 September 2014 2:54 p.m.
To: Bruce Thomas
Cc: Shanann Carr
Subject: FW: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Bruce,
As you couldn’t make it to our meeting last Thursday to discuss the below, could you please give
Shanann a call so that she can get clarity a ound the remaining point, in response to Penny Bright’s
complaint.
Thanks
Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council  Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
From: Shanann Carr [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Thursday, 28 August 2014 11:17 a.m.
To: Jacqueline Davidson
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Jacqui,
I’m just putting together a response for Ms Bright.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

I’m trying to determine if Auckland Council did in fact breach section 17(1) of the Public Records
Act, even if for a brief period. A small piece of the correspondence needs clarifying.
In reference to Bruce Thomas’ response to Ms Brights request for information. Penny asked for
the following:
“8) Please provide the information which confirms that in accordance with normal prudent
business practice, Auckland Council has now ‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and
accurate records of any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor…”
Bruce responded:
“…this information does not yet exist and your request is therefore refused under section 17(e)
of the act.”
Penny is not just referring to a ‘register’ here, but general ‘information’  I think this might be
where the sticking point is.
Could you please confirm on behalf of the Council that this  s correct? That “information which
confirms that in accordance with normal prudent business practice, Auckland Council has now
‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and accurate records of any matter which has been
contracted out to an independent contractor…” had not been created at the time of Ms Bright’s
request of 10 March 2011?
This is what I need to clarify before we can move forward with this.
Happy to discuss this over the phone. Le  me know a good time to call.
Shanann
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344
From: Jacqueline Dav dson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Friday, 18 July 2014 2:22 p.m.
To: Shanann Carr
Subject: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Shanann,
With reference to your investigation into Archives New Zealand response to the complaint laid by
Penny Bright where she believed that the Auckland Council, including its predecessors, were not
keeping appropriate records regarding the management of its contractor registers, I would make the
following comments:
·
I was not involved in the response to the initial complaint, but have reviewed the material you
have provided, and concur with the response of our letter dated 26 April 2011 the main points
being:
o Auckland Council is under no obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts
(as distinct from our obligation to create and maintain our records s17 PRA –
inferred)
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
o


The Council is currently in the process of developing such a register
o Once established, the information contained in the register would be withheld for
commercial reasons as detailed in section 7(2)(h) of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act
·
At the time of the original request from Ms Bright, 10 March 2011, the Auckland Council had
been in existence as an amalgamated entity for a little over 4 months. During the
amalgamation process, under the auspices of the ATA, considerable effort was expended to
discover and manage information relating to contractors from all the legacy councils. The
nature of contracts (length of term) means that this can be quite fluid, hence the time taken to
establish a definitive register during this settling in period.
·
Since this time, Council has established new procurement processes which manage our
contracts through a business system (SAP) integrated with the respective contract
document(s) stored in our corporate records repository, TRIM. The records  n TRIM are
managed by my team, and have appropriate security and rights assigned to them, as well as
retention and disposition actions taken from our approved retention schedule.
·
The Records and Archives team made extensive submissions on the new procurement
process and have been involved in the roll-out and training to the organisation.
·
In terms of managing the records created by contractors, we have developed the attached
guidelines for contractor records (heavily based on the gu dance of Archives NZ).
·
Should this request be made again, I would recommend that any contractor information be
withheld on the grounds that to release it would unreasonably prejudice the commercial
position of the person who supplied or is subject to the contract information. Naturally this
would be on a case-by-case basis.
I hope that this provides you with enough information, if not, or you would like further clarification,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
These comments are my opinion and not necessarily the view of the Auckland Council.
Rgds
Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Auckland Council
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or
attachments is strictly proh bited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and
erase all copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for any viruses or similar carried with
our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this
email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982



18
From:
Shanann Carr
To:
"Bruce Thomas"
Cc:
"Jacqueline Davidson"
Subject:
RE: Message from KMBT_C353
Date:
Thursday, 9 October 2014 10:18:00 AM
Attachments:
RE Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act.msg
Waterpressure Group - Penny Bright re Alleged Breach of S61(c) of Public Records Act 2005 -
attachments.pdf
Hi Bruce,
Thanks for the letter, we are almost there. We just need to add one more paragraph.
If you could please make reference to your response to Ms Bright, as per the attached email, I
can run this past our legal team to make sure it is all ok.
I can understand that the request would have been refused ‘on the grounds of substantial
collation’, but this was not the message Ms Bright received at the time
Ms Bright was told that this part of her request (question 8 – see attached PDF) was refused
under section 17(e) of LGOIMA - that the document alleged to contain the information
requested does not exist or cannot be found (suggesting a breech of the PRA). However your
recent letter suggests it was refused under section 17(f) -  hat the information requested cannot
be made available without substantial collation or research  If you could confirm the discrepancy
in the original response to Ms Bright that would be fantastic.
Many thanks,
Shanann Carr
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
From: Shanann Carr 
Sent: Tuesday, 30 September 2014 11:23 a.m.
To: 'Bruce Thomas'
Subject: RE: Message from KMBT_C353
Thanks Bruce,
Sorry for my delayed response.
I’ll ha e a look and let you know if it meets our requirements.
Shanann
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

18 
attachment 1
From:
Shanann Carr
To:
"Jacqueline Davidson"
Subject:
RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Date:
Monday, 8 September 2014 1:11:00 PM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
Thanks Jacqui
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344 
From: Jacqueline Davidson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Monday, 8 September 2014 1:07 p.m.
To: Shanann Carr
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Shanann,
I set up a meeting with Bruce last week to discuss this, unfortunately he couldn’t make it, and I have
since found out that he has changed jobs internally. Am trying to p n him down for you – hopefully this
won’t take too long.
Rgds
Jacqui
From: Shanann Carr [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Monday, 8 September 2014 1:04 p.m
To: Jacqueline Davidson
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Jacqui,
Just following up on our phone call last week.
You were going to jog Bruce’s memory and get him to give me a call?
I haven’t heard from him.
Shanann
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial  +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344
From: Jacqueline Davidson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Thursday, 28 August 2014 11:22 a.m.
To: Shanann Carr
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Shannon,
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

Probably best to discuss this. Any time next Tuesday afternoon would be good for me.
Thanks
Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
From: Shanann Carr [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Thursday, 28 August 2014 11:17 a.m.
To: Jacqueline Davidson
Subject: RE: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Jacqui,
I’m just putting together a response for Ms Bright.
I’m trying to determine if Auckland Council did in fact breach section 17(1) of the Public Records
Act, even if for a brief period. A small piece of the correspondence needs clarifying.
In reference to Bruce Thomas’ response to Ms Brigh s request for information. Penny asked for
the following:
“8) Please provide the information which confirms that in accordance with normal prudent
business practice, Auckland Council has now ‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and
accurate records of any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor…”
Bruce responded:
“…this information does not yet exist and your request is therefore refused under section 17(e)
of the act.”
Penny is not just  efe ring to a ‘register’ here, but general ‘information’. I think this might be
where the sticking point is.
Could you please confirm on behalf of the Council that this is correct? That “information which
confirms that in accordance with normal prudent business practice, Auckland Council has now
‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and accurate records of any matter which has been
contracted out to an independent contractor…” had not been created at the time of Ms Bright’s
request of 10 March 2011?
This is what I need to clarify before we can move forward with this.
Happy to discuss this over the phone. Let me know a good time to call.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

Shanann
Shanann Carr | Senior Archives Advisor | Recordkeeping Capability
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6034 | Extn: 9344
From: Jacqueline Davidson [mailto:[email address]] 
Sent: Friday, 18 July 2014 2:22 p.m.
To: Shanann Carr
Subject: Re-activating investigation under the Public Records Act
Hi Shanann,
With reference to your investigation into Archives New Zealand response to the complaint laid by
Penny Bright where she believed that the Auckland Council, including its predecessors, were not
keeping appropriate records regarding the management of its contractor registe s, I would make the
following comments:
·
I was not involved in the response to the initial complaint, but have reviewed the material you
have provided, and concur with the response of our letter dated 26 April 2011 the main points
being:
o Auckland Council is under no obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts
(as distinct from our obligation to create and maintain our records s17 PRA –
inferred)
o The Council is currently in the process of developing such a register
o Once established, the information contained in the register would be withheld for
commercial reasons as detailed in section 7(2)(h) of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act
·
At the time of the original request from Ms Bright, 10 March 2011, the Auckland Council had
been in existence as an amalgama ed entity for a little over 4 months. During the
amalgamation process, under the auspices of the ATA, considerable effort was expended to
discover and manage information relating to contractors from all the legacy councils. The
nature of contracts (length of  erm) means that this can be quite fluid, hence the time taken to
establish a definitive register during this settling in period.
·
Since this time, Council has established new procurement processes which manage our
contracts through a business system (SAP) integrated with the respective contract
document(s) stored  n our corporate records repository, TRIM. The records in TRIM are
managed by my team, and have appropriate security and rights assigned to them, as well as
retention and disposition actions taken from our approved retention schedule.
·
The Records and Archives team made extensive submissions on the new procurement
process and have been involved in the roll-out and training to the organisation.
·
In terms of managing the records created by contractors, we have developed the attached
guidelines for contractor records (heavily based on the guidance of Archives NZ).
·
Should this request be made again, I would recommend that any contractor information be
withheld on the grounds that to release it would unreasonably prejudice the commercial
position of the person who supplied or is subject to the contract information. Naturally this
would be on a case-by-case basis.
I hope that this provides you with enough information, if not, or you would like further clarification,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
These comments are my opinion and not necessarily the view of the Auckland Council.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982
Rgds


Jacqui
Jacqueline Davidson | Records and Archives Manager
Information Services | Enterprise Information Delivery | Records and Archives
[mobile number]
Auckland Council, Level 5, 135 Albert St, Auckland 1142
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Auckland Council
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or
attachments is strictly proh bited. If you have received this email message in error please not fy us immediately and
erase all copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for a y viruses or similar carried with
our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network  Any views expressed in this
email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
Released under the Official Information Act 1982


18 
attachment 2
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982


Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982








20
Archives New Zealand, 10 Mulgrave Street, Thorndon, Wellington 6011 
PO Box 12050, Thorndon, Wellington 6144 
Phone +64 4 499 5595 
Fax +64 4 495 6210 
Website www d a.govt.nz  www.archives.govt.nz 
19 December 2014 
Penny Bright  
[email address] 
Dear Ms Bright 
Request for information 
Thank you for your  request for info m ion about  you   omplaint of 23 May 2011 
regarding the recordkeeping obliga
ns o  Auckland 
uncil under the Public 
Records Act 2005.  
At the time of your original 
laint  we 
rted to investigate the issues raised. The 
investigation was not  omplete  and th e was no response provided to you.  I 
apologise again for th s failure. 
My  staff  have approa
ed  uckland Co ncil regarding your initial complaint, which 
was that Auckland Coun
 had not complied with section 17(1) of the Public Records 
Act pertain g to 
 creati
 and maintenance of records. Your complaint specifically 
related   the allege  failure  f Auckland Council to create and maintain  a  central 
regist   of contracts, 
d full and accurate records of any matter dealt with by an 
indep
dent contractor  
DRAFT
Auckland 
uncil did not  provide access to the information you requested for a 
number of re
on   n reference to section 17 of the  Local Government Official 
Information and 
etings Act 1987: 
• s17(e) the information does not exist or cannot be found,
• s 7( ) the information could not be made available without substantial collation
or research, 
• s17(g) the information was not held specifically by Auckland Council.
Where the  Council claimed the  information  did  not exist  is the point where you 
argued that the Council breached the Public Records Act. 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

After following up with Auckland Council, my staff have not found any evidence that 
the Council was  in breach  of the Public Records Act at the time of your request. 
Auckland Council maintains  they had records relating to contracts, but had not yet 
created a central register relating to this information.  They claim that your request for 
a central register was refused because one had not been created. Auckland Council 
also claim that at, the time of your request, information regarding contracts was not in 
an accessible form and would have required substantial collation and research  to 
provide access. 
Following the establishment of the Auckland Council, the Council agrees it took some 
time to create a complete system for maintaining contracto   records  for all 
predecessor councils. However  they have  presented us with e dence  hat  systems 
are now in place to manage contractor records,  so we are s
fied that steps have 
been  made to improve management of the  records  sinc  the t
e of your original 
complaint.  If you were to make the same request for a  central  reg
er of contracts 
today,  it seems likely that  the request could not  be  efused on the g unds of the 
information not existing. 
Requests for information held by local auth rities ar  regulated by the Local 
Government Official Information and Meetings Ac  Ac
rding to section 17B of that 
Act, if a request for information is refused under se
ons 17(e) or 17(f) the council 
has a duty to consult with the reque
r to ensure a r
uest for information can be 
managed. If you believe  the Auckla d C
cil has no  cooperated appropriately 
regarding your request for informatio  you m
 make a formal complaint to the 
Ombudsman. 
Thank for your patience  hile w  have inv stigated your complaint. 
Yours sincerely 
Marily  Little 
Chief A
ivist  DRAFT
Released under the Official Information Act 1982



21
From:
Kylie Welch
To:
Penny Bright
Subject:
Letter from the Chief Archivist, Marilyn Little
Date:
Tuesday, 23 December 2014 11:38:00 AM
Attachments:
Penny Bright Letter from Chief Archivist 19 December 2014.pdf
image001.png
Dear Penny,
Please find attached a letter from our Chief Archivist, Marilyn Little.  Please note that the
attached is a scan of the original letter.  If you would also like for me to send the physical
letter, please advise the address you would like this sent to. 
Best regards,
Kylie Welch | Archives NZ Advisor | Advice and Compliance Team
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
Direct Dial: +64 4 894 6055 | Extn: 9255 
10 Mulgrave Street | PO Box 12-050, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
www.archives.govt.nz | www.thecommunityarchive.org.nz
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982





22
From:
Antony Moss
To:
Marilyn Little
Cc:
Polly Martin
Subject:
Record of conversation with Penny Bright 22 May 2015
Date:
Friday, 22 May 2015 5:11:29 PM
Importance:
Low
Marilyn
Penny Bright visited 10 Mulgrave Street today hoping to speak with you, but I did instead since
you were in Dunedin. 
I took a copy of your letter to Penny of 19 December 2014 (A818240) that concluded our work
on her delayed 2011 complaint about Auckland Council’s lack of a register of contracts.  Penny
said she had not received the letter.  We (Kylie Welch) had emailed it to Penny on 23 December. 
The correct email address was used, so it’s not clear why the email was not received. 
I therefore took Penny through the letter, apologising again for the long delay in finalising the
matter and outlining our reasoning, which she understood.  She advised that there have been
some developments in making contract information publicly available, for example Auckland
Transport now has a public register of contracts of over $100,000 value. 
Penny also discussed some of her other interactions with Auckland Council on transparency and
rates, with select committees and with the Local Government Commission.  She also outlined her
ideas about how the PRA could be a foundation for public accountability and how the Chief
Archivist and Ombudsman roles could develop   I noted that there were many views about how
core information and accountability statutes could work together better.  Penny left me with
some written material which I have not filed because it is not directly relevant to PRA matters.  I
will pass this material on to you Marilyn once I’ve been through it. 
Direct dial 04 496 1392 - Extn 9392 - Mobile: 027 476 0361 
Released under the Official Information Act 1982





24
From:
Vanessa L. King
To:
Antony Moss
Subject:
RE: Penny Bright private prosecution under the Public Records Act of Auckland Council
Date:
Friday, 23 September 2016 11:57:31 AM
Hi Tony
I’ve now read through:
·
The NBR article, dated 19 September 2016
·
The NBR Radio interview with Graham McCready, dated 19 September 2016
·
The Whaleoil article, dated 20 September 2016
These sources do not provide any new information that would lead us to revisit Penny Bright’s
complaint.
Kind Regards
Vanessa King | Senior Archivist/Archives Advisor | Advice and Compliance
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga
From: Antony Moss 
Sent: Wednesday, 21 September 2016 8:24 a.m.
To: Vanessa L. King
Cc: Rebecca Smart
Subject: FW: Penny Bright private prosecution under the Public Records Act of Auckland Council
Vanessa, could you take a look at the Whaleoil article in the link below and the earlier NBR that it
links to?  Library & Research Services shou d be able to source the NBR article. 
Archives New Zealand has previousl  assessed this issue at Penny Bright’s prompting (see
attached Objective link).  Please check whether there is any new information that would lead us
to look at it again. 
Thanks
Antony Moss | Director Government Recordkeeping
Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kawanatanga 
Direct dial +64 4 496 1392  |  Extn 9392  |  Mobile: +64 27 476 0361  | 
www.records archives.govt.nz
Archives New Zealand is part of the Department of Internal Affairs
From: Rebecca Smart 
Sent: Wednesday, 21 September 2016 8:00 a.m.
To: Antony Moss; Mike Chapman
Subject: Fwd: Penny Bright private prosecution under the Public Records Act of Auckland Council
Have you seen this
Released under the Official Information Act 1982

Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Simon Caseley <[email address]>
Date: 20 September 2016 at 7:20:15 PM NZST
To: Rebecca Smart <[email address]>
Subject: Penny Bright private prosecution under the Public Records Act
of Auckland Council

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2016/09/convicted-blackmailer-and-tax-fraudster-
rides-again-with-penny-not-so-bright-for-a-sidekick/#more-273096
Sent from my Sony Xperia™ smartphone
This email message and any accompanying attachments do not necessarily
reflect the views of Maritime New Zealand and may contain information that
is confidential and subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient, you must not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this email message
or its attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender by email immediately, and erase all copies of this message and
attachments. Thank you. Address: Maritime New Zealand, Level 11, 1 Grey
Street, Wellington 6011. PO Box 25620, Wellington 6146 Tel: 0508 22 55 22
(04 473 0111) Fax: 04 494 1263. www.maritimenz.govt.nz
Released under the Of icial Information Act 1982