Open main menu Close main menu

Requests for unredacted copies of the Preliminary Treaty Impact Analysis for the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill

Legislation:
Official Information Act 1982
Agency:
Ministry for Regulation
Ombudsman:
John Allen
Issue date:
Format:
PDF,
Word
Language:
English

Excerpt from summary

On 19 November 2024, the Ministry for Regulation (the Ministry) commenced public consultation for the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill. As part of the public consultation process, the Ministry proactively published several documents on its website, including a Preliminary Treaty Impact Analysis for the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill. The Preliminary Treaty Impact Analysis was proactively released with partial redactions under section 9(2)(h) of the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA), to maintain legal professional privilege. 

Numerous requesters made requests to the Ministry for an unredacted copy of the Preliminary Treaty Impact Analysis. In each case, the Ministry maintained the same decision that it made on the proactively released document.  

Former Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier received a large volume of complaints about the Ministry’s decisions on the requests. Mr Boshier’s term as Chief Ombudsman ended on 28 March 2025, and I assumed responsibility for the complaints, which I decided to investigate as a group because they all related to the same information.

Subject to any stronger public interest in release, section 9(2)(h) of the OIA provides good reason to withhold information where it is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege. 

On 9 June 2025, I wrote to complainants with my provisional opinion that the Ministry was entitled to withhold the redacted information, on the basis that section 9(2)(h) of the OIA provided good reason for doing so. I provided complainants the opportunity to comment on my provisional opinion.

I have considered all comments received in response to my provisional opinion. Having considered all of the available information, I have formed the final opinion that the Ministry was entitled to withhold the redacted information, on the basis that section 9(2)(h) of the OIA provided good reason for doing so.

The full opinion can be found in the documents above.

Last updated: