Just before Christmas, the Chief Ombudsman announced she had begun a review of all aspects of Official Information Act practice. It will be wide-ranging, encompassing a formal review of 12 government agencies and a survey of all 27 ministers' offices and a further 63 agencies. Dame Beverley Wakem says the
Editorial: Information act overdue for overhaul
Subscribe to listen
Dame Beverley Wakem, Chief Ombudsman. Photo / Marty Melville
None of this would have come as a great surprise to Dame Beverley. Stories similar to that of Mr Gregorash told to her by a number of people helped spark her review. Her office has also been swamped with complaints, and she has voiced concern about the increasing number of officials who failed to understand the importance of the OIA.
In particular, she appears irked by an "excessive reference upwards for approval" when there was no reason to do this. That, and other ploys, cause unnecessary delays.
Dame Beverley believes there is fundamentally nothing wrong with the act, only the execution. But a Law Commission report three years ago said more than bureaucratic mindset had to change.
Among other things, it recommended the creation of a new standalone office to oversee compliance with the act. In fact, a much better resourced office of the Ombudsman could extend its current role to also champion open government and serve as a watchdog for the underlying principles. Either way, former Justice Minister Judith Collins chose to ignore the commission's most telling recommendations.
Dame Beverley's health check will surely confirm that much more needs to be done. One should be changing the legislation's name to the Freedom of Information Act. The information belongs, after all, to us, not to officials.