Dear University of Canterbury,

When deciding whether to cut certain Arts courses the University of Canterbury invited concerned individuals to submit feedback on the cuts, with a deadline of the Friday the 18th of May at 5pm. I would like to request the following under the Official Information Act:

1) a copy of all submissions that were provided on the proposed cuts. If the amount of feedback is large enough to trigger a s18(f) refusal I would like to instead request instead the name of each submitter.

2) the number of people who met with the Pro-Vice-Chancellor of Arts or the Vice-Chancellor to discuss the proposed cuts. If anyone who met the PVC was representing an organization or group I would like to request the name of that group.

3) it is mentioned in the Vice-Chancellor's report for May that "Finance, Planning and Resources Committee of Council has been provided with copies of all materials – proposals, submissions, responses, minutes and recommendations." I would like to request any material that this committee was provided with that are not covered by request 1. If the amount of material provided is large enough to trigger a s18(f) refusal I would like to instead request the title/subject of each document provided.

Feel free to contact me if you wish me to clarify my request. May I please have a reply confirming that my request has been received?

Yours faithfully,

Joshua Grainger

Dear Juliet Hamill and Tom Norcliffe,

First, thank you very much for dealing with my request. You've been very helpful.

I was wondering if the Universty would reconsider not releasing the submissions as the Ombudsmen has previously ruled that submissions will usually be available unless the '[organization] states that it will regard all submissions as having been made in confidence.' No such statement appears to have been put in this case. (source: Volume 6, Issue 2 of the Ombudsmen Quarterly Review)

As for the names of submitters, the Ombudsmen has ruled on this issue also. To quote the Quarterly Review: 'A complaint was made to an Ombudsman about the deletions [of names of submitters], and the view was formed that there was no good reason under the OIA to withhold the names of the organisations [who had submitted]. However, there was good reason under s.9(2)(a) of the OIA to withhold the identities of those individuals who had expressed concerns that the release of their identity would interfere with their privacy.' (source: Volume 10, Issue 3 of the Ombudsmen Quarterly Review)

Given this, will the University reconsider its view in withholding submissions? If not, I will likely be making a complaint to the Ombudsmen.

Yours sincerely,

Joshua Grainger