No confidentiality in Government Ministers' travel expense claims; information 'official', regardless of purpose of travel

The Department of Internal Affairs (the Department) refused a request for information relating to the surface travel expenses of Government Ministers. The Department’s practice prior to this request had been to summarise the information and, in the interests of accountability, make it available on its website, on a quarterly basis.

The Department initially relied on sections 18(f), 6(d) and 9(2)(a) of the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA) to withhold the information but, further to the requester’s agreement to refine the request, revised its initial decision, relying instead on section 9(2)(ba)(i) of the OIA, on the grounds that the raw data was subject to an obligation of confidence.

The Chief Ombudsman considered that the information at issue was clearly ‘official information’ within the meaning of the OIA and was not persuaded that information relating to the expenditure of public money, regardless of whether the travel was for private or official purposes, could be subject to an overriding obligation of confidence.

Further, the Chief Ombudsman considered that even if an obligation of confidence could have been said to exist, this would have been outweighed in the circumstances of this particular case by the public interest in disclosure.

Consequently, the Chief Ombudsman formed the final opinion that the request should not have been refused and formally recommended release of the information at issue.